Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,459

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals

Kararli, Tugrul T.·1995·Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition

Abstract

In addition to metabolic differences, the anatomical, physiological, and biochemical differences in the gastrointestinal (G.I.) tract of the human and common laboratory animals can cause significant variation in drug absorption from the oral route. Among the physiological factors, pH, bile, pancreatic juice, and mucus and fluid volume and content can modify dissolution rates, solubility, transit times, and membrane transport of drug molecules. The microbial content of the G.I. tract can significantly affect the reductive metabolism and enterohepatic circulation of drugs and colonic delivery of formulations. The transit time of dosage forms can be significantly different between species due to different dimensions and propulsive activities of the G.I. tract. The lipid/protein composition of the enterocyte membrane along the G.I. tract can alter binding and passive, active, and carrier‐mediated transport of drugs. The location and number of Peyer's patches can also be important in the absorption of large molecules and particulate matter. While small animals, rats, mice, guinea pigs, and rabbits, are most suitable for determining the mechanism of drug absorption and bioavailability values from powder or solution formulations, larger animals, dogs, pigs, and monkeys, are used to assess absorption from formulations. The understanding of physiological, anatomical, and biochemical differences between the G.I. tracts of different animal species can lead to the selection of the correct animal model to mimic the bioavailability of compounds in the human. This article reviews the anatomical, physiological, and biochemical differences between the G.I. tracts of humans and commonly used laboratory animals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bdd.2510160502

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,459

Metadata

Authors
Kararli, T. T.
Venue
Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-07
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
351-380
ISSN
  • 0142-2782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-081X
OpenAlex
W2018445772
Cited by
1,459
References
1
FWCI
11.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bdd.2510160502
The paper
Kararli, T. T. (1995). Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdd.2510160502

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.