Ascorbic acid and gallic acid mitigate behavioural deficits and loss of cerebellar myelin induced by Bisphenol-A in Wistar rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Bisphenol-A (BPA) is a chemical component of plastics, polycarbonates, and epoxy resins making it an environmentally ubiquitous chemical. Its toxicity has been linked to several disorders including neurological disorders. Gallic acid (GA) and Ascorbic acid (AA) are both antioxidants that have been reported to have neuroprotective effects. We therefore investigated the neuroprotective effects of GA and AA on BPA-induced neurotoxicity. Forty-eight (48) Wistar rats were grouped into Control, BPA, BPA+AA, BPA+GA, AA, and GA groups with eight rats in each group. All treatments were administered via oral gavage for 21 days. Behavioral experiments were conducted to assess forelimb strength (hanging wire test), anxiety (open field and elevated plus maze tests), depression (forced swim test), and spatial memory (Morris water maze). Rats were perfused and brain samples were collected for Luxol fast blue staining. Sera were collected to evaluate the levels of inflammatory cytokines via Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay. Results There was no significant difference in hanging latency between all the groups. There were also no significant changes in the open field test but the elevated plus maze showed an increase in time spent in closed arms in the BPA group indicative of anxiety. GA and AA reduced the duration of immobility that was elevated in the BPA group which suggests they have antidepressant-like effects. Additionally, we observed disruption in the Purkinje cell layer of the cerebellum in the BPA-alone group. Conclusion BPA seems to cause anxiety and depressive-like effects which are ameliorated by the gallic acid and ascorbic acid.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".