Canola Protein Hydrolysates Show Osteogenic Activity in MC3T3‐E1 Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoporosis, the most prevalent metabolic bone disorder, is a major public health issue. Previous studies indicated the potential of food components in mitigating the risks of osteoporosis. The study aimed to evaluate the potential of canola protein hydrolysates (CPH) on osteoclastogenesis using a pre-osteoblast cell MC3T3-E1. Twenty-two CPHs were prepared by 12 different proteases, either individually or in combination. Three CPHs, prepared by trypsin (CPH-T), Protex 6L (CPH-P), and the combination of Protex 6L and thermoase (CPH-PT) showed promising activity in promoting in vitro bone formation. CPH-T and CPH-PT improved cell proliferation at a concentration of 10 ug/ml, while all three hydrolysates exhibited cytotoxicity at 1000 ug/ml. All three hydrolysates promoted the level of runt-related transcription factor 2 (RUNX2) and type I collagen, and mineralization in osteoblast cells, in a dose-dependent manner. Additionally, these three hydrolysates elevated the osteoprotegerin (OPG) level and reduced the level of receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL). This study indicated the activity of CPHs in the promotion of bone formation and prevention of osteoclastogenesis, suggesting the potential of CPHs as a promising functional food ingredient against osteoporosis.
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) | 0.000 | 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".