MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174076883 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2020-0293

Effect of gallic acid on the reproduction of adolescent male Brandt’s voles (<i>Lasiopodomys brandtii</i>)

2021· article· en· W3174076883 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xin Dai, Xiaofeng Sun, Aiqin Wang, Wanhong Wei, Shengmei Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSelenium in Biological Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyEpididymisReproductionSuperoxide dismutaseMalondialdehydeCatalaseSpermAntioxidantGlutathione peroxidaseInternal medicineAndrologyEndocrinologyOxidative stressBiochemistryGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gallic acid (GA), a phenol that is present in various plants, potentially contains antioxidant properties. This study aimed to investigate the effects of GA on the reproduction of adolescent male Brandt’s voles (Lasiopodomys brandtii (Radde, 1861)). Antioxidant levels and apoptosis in the testis, as well as reproductive physiology, were evaluated in adolescent males treated with GA. The results showed that a low dose of GA enhanced relative epididymis mass and the sperm density in the epididymis, increased the mRNA levels of steroidogenic acute regulatory protein in the testis, and reduced the percentages of abnormal and dead sperm. In addition, a low dose of GA significantly increased the levels of superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase, and decreased the level of malondialdehyde in the testis, as well as the mRNA and protein levels of the apoptosis-related gene, caspase-3. However, a high dose of GA sharply reduced the mean diameter of the seminiferous tubules compared with a low dose. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that GA treatment during puberty affects the reproductive responses of male Brandt’s voles in a dose-dependent manner by regulating antioxidant levels and apoptosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicSelenium in Biological SystemsFrench-language works237,207