Improved Extraction of Ginkgotoxin (4′-O-methylpyridoxine) from Ginkgo biloba Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple extraction procedure was applied to the analysis of canned/packaged white nuts and Ginkgo biloba extracts. Extraction by shaking with water at room temperature was more convenient to use than a previously published Soxhlet procedure for analysis of packaged Ginkgo biloba seeds (white nuts) for ginkgotoxin; recoveries from spiked dried seeds by the simple extraction procedure averaged 76%. Determination was by liquid chromatography with UV or fluorescence detection. Recoveries of ginkgotoxin from a spiked and unspiked natural health product (powder from Ginkgo biloba capsules) were equivalent by both procedures; recovery from spiked powder by the simple extraction procedure was 81%. Application of this extraction procedure in the analysis of 6 samples of white nuts (vacuum packaged and canned products) showed that free ginkgotoxin was present in 5 samples at concentrations up to 25 microg/g dry weight. Total ginkgotoxin was determined after hydrolysis with beta-glucosidase of sample extracts in which a peak corresponding to the 5'-O-glucoside was detected. Ginkgotoxin was determined in 10 Ginkgo biloba natural health products by the same method at levels up to 181 microg/g.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".