Wheatgrass extract has chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects on porcine cartilage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lameness is a commonly observed disorder in sows and negatively impacts both animal welfare and the profitability of the pig sector. The purpose of this study was to determine anti-inflammatory and/or chondroprotective effects of wheatgrass (WG) on porcine cartilage explants stimulated with lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Explants were aseptically prepared from the intercarpal joints of nine market-weight pigs and placed in culture at 37°C for a total of 120 hours. For the final 96 hours, explants were conditioned with an aqueous extract of WG (0, 5 or 15 μg/mL), and for the final 48 hours explants were stimulated with LPS (0 or 10 µg/mL). Media was removed and replaced every 24 hours. Samples from the final 48 hours were analyzed for biomarkers of cartilage inflammation [prostaglandin E2(PGE2) and nitric oxide (NO)] and cartilage structure [glycosaminoglycan (GAG)], and cartilage explants were stained for an estimate of cell viability. Stimulation of explants with LPS significantly increased media concentrations of PGE2, GAG and NO compared with that from unstimulated explants. LPS stimulation did not significantly affect cell viability. Conditioning of explants with WG (5 μg/mL) significantly reduced LPS-stimulated cartilage release of PGE2, NO, and GAG (5 and 15 μg/mL), without impairing chondrocyte viability. These data provide evidence for a non-cytotoxic chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory effect of WG extract in cartilage and suggest a role of WG in protection against cartilage breakdown, inflammation, and pain associated with osteoarthritis.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".