Toxicological studies on the botanical supplement LI12542F6 containing extracts of<i>Sphaeranthus indicus</i>flower heads and<i>Mangifera indica</i>(mango tree) bark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract LI12542F6, a botanical extract composed ofSphaeranthus indicusandMangifera indica, was evaluated for mutagenicity in bacteria,clastogenicity in mouse bone marrow, acute oral and dermal toxicity in the rat, irritation (dermal, eye) in rabbit, and subacute and subchronic toxicity (28 and 90 days) in the rat. All studies followed standardOECDtest protocols, in accordance with the principles of Good Laboratory Practice (GLP).LI12542F6 did not induce mutations in the bacterial assay usingSalmonellaandEscherichia colistrains, nor did it induce genotoxic effects in erythrocytes from mouse bone marrow.LI12542F6 was found to have oral and dermalLD50values greater than the limit dose of 2,000 mg/kg body weight in the rat. In an eye irritation/corrosion test,LI12542F6 caused conjunctival redness, corneal opacity, and chemosis and is classified as Category 2A (“irritating to eyes – reversible eye effect”). Doses in the 28‐day and 90‐day rat oral toxicity studies were 0, 500, 1,000, and 1,500 and 0, 1,000, 1,500, and 2,000 mg/kg body weight/day, respectively, administered by gavage. Both studies featured a recovery period. Minor effects were random and not treatment related except for local irritation of the forestomach in the 28‐day study, evidenced by histopathologic examination, in mid‐ and high‐dose animals. The frequency and severity of these effects were reduced in the recovery group; irritation was not found in the forestomach of rats in the 90‐day study. The no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was greater than the highest dose tested, that is, >2,000 mg/kg in the 90‐day study. This botanical composition will be marketed commercially for muscle health as Myotor™.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".