Subchronic Toxicity Evaluation of Dietary Administration of a Fungal Biomass From <i>Rhizomucor pusillus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fungal-derived food products align with sustainable food supply principles and offer a sustainable and nutritious option for consumers. Rhizomucor pusillus strain CBS 143028 has emerged as a candidate food ingredient. Fermentation of R. pusillus CBS 143028 results in a mycelium biomass mainly comprising fungal proteins, cell wall components, and micronutrients. Although R. pusillus has a history of safe use in the production of food enzymes and in traditional fermented foods, the fungal biomass obtained after fermentation of R. pusillus CBS 143028 is considered a novel food and requires a thorough safety assessment. To this end, a 90-day oral toxicity study was conducted in which Wistar rats (10/sex/group) were provided diets containing 0, 100,000, 200,000, or 300,000 ppm of R. pusillus mycelium. Standard toxicity study parameters as given in OECD Test Guideline 408 were examined. The mean achieved dosages of R. pusillus mycelium were 6398, 12,738, or 19,668 mg/kg body weight/day for males and 7235, 14,949, or 22,461 mg/kg body weight/day for females in the low-, mid-, and high-dose groups, respectively. Although statistically significant differences were reported, these effects were not considered biologically relevant or test article-related due to atypical values in the control groups, the lack of a dose response relationship, or were attributed to normal biological variation. Thus, the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) was established at 300,000 ppm (corresponding to 19,668 and 22,461 mg/kg body weight/day for males and females, respectively), the highest concentration tested.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".