Evaluation of Antioxidant, Antidiabetic and Antiobesity Potential of Selected Traditional Medicinal Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated potential antidiabetic and antiobesity properties in vitro of selected medicinal plants. The hot water (WE) and ethanol extracts (EE) of sweet gale (Myrica gale L.), roseroot (Rhodiola rosea L.), sheep sorrel (Rumex acetosa L.), stinging nettles (Utrica dioica L.) and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale L.) were tested for total antioxidant capacity using ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) and DPPH• scavenging capacity assays, followed by -amylase, -glucosidase and formation of advanced glycation end products (AGE) inhibition assays in vitro. Myrica gale EE had the highest total phenolic content (12.4 mmol GAE/L), FRAP value (17.4 mmol TE/L) and DPPH• scavenging activity (IC50= 3.28 mg/L). Similarly, Myrica gale also exhibited significantly lower IC50 values for the percentage inhibition of -amylase (IC50 =62.65 mg/L) and -glucosidase (IC50 =27.20 mg/L) compared to acarbose (IC50 =91.71 mg/L; IC50 = 89.50 mg/L, respectively) (p ≤ 0.05). The 3T3-L1 preadipocyte study also revealed that Myrica gale EE (54.8%) and stinging nettles (62.2 % EE; 63.2% WE) significantly inhibited the adipogenesis in adipocytes in vitro (p≤ 0.05). Polyphenols present in these medicinal plants have the potential to use in managing type 2 diabetes and obesity.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".