A comparative study of acetyl-<scp>l</scp>-carnitine and caloric restriction impact on hippocampal autophagy, apoptosis, neurogenesis, and astroglial function in AlCl<sub>3</sub>-induced Alzheimer’s in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a worldwide chronic progressive neurodegenerative disease. We aimed to investigate and compare the neuroprotective impact of acetyl-l-carnitine and caloric restriction (CR) on AlCl3-induced AD to explore the pathogenesis and therapeutic strategies of AD. Sixty-seven adult male Wistar rats were allocated into Control, AlCl3, AlCl3–acetyl-l-carnitine, and AlCl3–CR groups. Each of AlCl3 and acetyl-l-carnitine were given by gavage in a daily dose of 100 mg/kg and CR was conducted by giving 70% of the daily average caloric intake of the control group. Rats were subjected to behavioral assessment using open field test, Y maze, novel object recognition test and passive avoidance test, biochemical assay of serum phosphorylated tau (pTau), hippocampal homogenate phosphorylated adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase, Beclin-1, Bcl-2-associated X protein, and B cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl2) as well as hippocampal Ki-67 and glial fibrillary acidic protein immunohistochemistry. AlCl3-induced cognitive and behavioral deficits coincident with impaired autophagy and enhanced apoptosis associated with defective neurogenesis and defective astrocyte activation. Acetyl-l-carnitine and CR partially protect against AlCl3-induced behavioral, cognitive, biochemical, and histological changes, with more ameliorative effect of acetyl-l-carnitine on hippocampal apoptotic markers, and more obvious behavioral and histological improvement with CR.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".