Neuropharmacological activity of the crude ethanolic extract of Syzygium aromaticum flowering bud
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Backgroud: Present study was designed to assess the possibility of in-vivo neuropharmacological effects of the ethanolic extract of Syzygium aromaticum flowering buds by using behavioral models of mice.Methods: Anxiolytic effects of the extract were assessed using open field test (OFT), hole cross test (HCT), elevated plus maze (EPM), and hole board test (HBT) respectively; while antidepressant properties were determined using forced swimming test (FST), and tail suspension test (TST). Finally thiopental sodium (TS)-induced sleeping time test helped us to evaluate the sedative-hypnotic potential of the extract.Results: In OFT and HCT, the movement of the mice decreased significantly (*p<0.005) for the extract treated groups when compare to control. This decrease indicates the suppression of locomotor activities of mice (from 1st-5th observation periods). Moreover, the increase of the spending time in EPM open arm, and head dipping in HBT endorsed the anxiolytic-like behavior of the extract. In FST and TST, S. aromaticum extract significantly (*p<0.05, **p<0.001) reduced the immobility time of the mice. Approx. 29% and 34% reduction of the immobility time were found in FST for 250 mg/kg, and 500 mg/kg b.w. doses respectively, which clearly indicates the presence of the antidepressant compounds in extract. Finally, TS-induced sleeping time test confirmed the potency of the sedative response of the extract (sleeping duration were 45.4±2.6 minutes for control, whereas 87.0±1.79 minutes for 500 mg/kg b.w. extract treated group). The observed neurological response may be due to binding of any phytoconstituent with gamma-amino-butyric acid (GABAA) or benzodiazepine (BZD) receptors.Conclusion: Our study results suggest that the ethanolic extract of S. aromaticum possess remarkable sedative, antidepressant and anxiolytic activities with a demand of further investigation for the drug development program.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".