Naringin prevents the impairment of hepatic mitochondrial function in diabetic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously demonstrated that naringin (NAR) protects against liver damage in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes in rats. The aim of this study was to elucidate whether NAR is also able to protect the functioning, biogenesis and dynamics of the liver mitochondria in diabetic rats (DM). The activities of isocitrate dehydrogenase and malate dehydrogenase from the Krebs cycle, complex I-III from electron chain and adenosine triphosphate synthase were decreased in DM rats, effects that were blocked by NAR. The gene expression of mitofusin-2 and GTPase dynamin-related protein 1, markers of mitochondrial fusion and fission, were decreased in DM rats, which was prevented by NAR. Total glutathione was decreased and protein carbonyl contents as well as the activity of the antioxidant enzymes were increased in DM rats. All these changes were blocked by NAR. In conclusion, NAR protects the liver mitochondria from DM rats avoiding changes in the activity of Krebs cycle, the respiratory chain and the oxidative phosphorylation as well as preventing alterations in the fusion-fission processes. These effects are mediated, at least in part, by decreasing oxidative stress and anomalies in the enzymatic antioxidant system. Further studies are necessary to validate efficacy and safety of NAR for human use.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".