MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414450058 · doi:10.1002/jat.4886

An In Vitro and In Vivo Assessment of the Genotoxic Potential of Maizinol (UP165), a <scp> <i>Zea mays</i> </scp> Leaf Extract

2025· article· en· W4414450058 on OpenAlexaff
Jean K. Weston, Barry Lynch, James Akingbasote

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Toxicology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
Canadian institutionsIntertek (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotoxicityMicronucleus testIn vivoToxicityIn vitroMicronucleus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Benzoxazinoids are secondary metabolites produced in monocotyledons and some dicotyledons from the Acanthaceae, Ranunculaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Plantaginaceae, and Lamiaceae families. Benzoxazinoids are commonly consumed in bread and cereal products that have been ingested for decades, which supports the safe use of benzoxazinoids as food ingredients. Powdered corn leaf extract (UP165), trade name Maizinol, containing 0.2%-0.3% w/w benzoxazinoid 6-methoxy-2-benzoxazolinone (6-MBOA), was the subject of genetic toxicity studies conducted according to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Test Guidelines (TG). The toxicity tests evaluated the safety of corn leaf extract (as Maizinol containing 0.2%-0.3% 6-MBOA) using a bacterial reverse mutation assay (OECD Test Guideline 471) at doses of 313, 625, 1250, 2500, or 5000 μg/plate; in vitro mammalian chromosomal aberration test (OECD TG 473) at concentrations of 9.77, 19.5, 39.1, or 78.1 μg/mL; and in vivo mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test (OECD TG 474) at a dose of 750, 1500, or 3000 mg/kg body weight/day. Results demonstrate that Maizinol (UP165), at maximum test concentrations of 5000 μg/plate in the bacterial mutagenicity study, 78.1 μg/mL in the mammalian chromosomal aberration test, and a dose of 3000 mg/kg body weight in the rat micronucleus test, did not elicit genotoxic or mutagenic effects under the reported test conditions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ToxicologySame topicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactionsFrench-language works237,207