Effect of soya phosphatidylcholine and possible underlying mechanism on ischemia/reperfusion injury in isolated perfused rat heart: an experimental and computational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to assess the effect of soya phosphatidylcholine (SPC) against ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury and the possible underlying mechanism using experimental and computational studies. I/R injury was induced by global ischemia for 30 min followed by reperfusion for 120 min. The perfusion of the SPC was performed for 10 min before inducing global ischemia. In the mechanistic study, the involvement of specific cellular pathways was identified using various inhibitors such as ATP-dependent potassium channel (KATP) inhibitor (glibenclamide), protein kinase C (PKC) inhibitor (chelerythrine), non-selective nitric oxide synthase inhibitor (L-NAME), and endothelium remover (Triton X-100). The computational study of various ligands was performed on toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) protein using AutoDock version 4.0. SPC (100 μM) significantly decreased the levels of cardiac damage markers and %infarction compared with the vehicle control (VC). Furthermore, cardiodynamics (indices of left ventricular contraction (dp/dtmax), indices of left ventricular relaxation (dp/dtmin), coronary flow, and antioxidant enzyme levels were significantly improved as compared with VC. This protective effect was attenuated by glibenclamide, chelerythrine, and Triton X-100, but it was not attenuated by L-NAME. The computational study showed a significant bonding affinity of SPC to the TLR4-MD2 complex. Thus, SPC reduced myocardial I/R injury in isolated perfused rat hearts, which might be governed by the KATP channel, PKC, endothelium response, and TLR4-MyD88 signaling pathway.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".