MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1818754576 · doi:10.1038/npre.2007.631.1

Biological Activities of Extracts from Sumac (Rhus spp.): A Review

2007· review· en· W1818754576 on OpenAlexaff
Sierra Rayne, Giuseppe Mazza

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Precedings · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMedicinal Plant Research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioproductsBiotechnologyAntifungalBiologyTraditional medicineAntimicrobialMedicineBiofuelMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sumac is the common name for a genus (Rhus) that contains over 250 individual species of flowering plants in the family Anacardiaceae. These plants are found in temperate and tropical regions worldwide, often grow in areas of marginal agricultural capacity, and have a long history of use by indigenous peoples for medicinal and other uses. The research efforts on sumac extracts to date indicate a promising potential for this plant family to provide renewable bioproducts with the following reported desirable bioactivities: antifibrogenic, antifungal, antiinflammatory, antimalarial, antimicrobial, antimutagenic, antioxidant, antithrombin, antitumorigenic, antiviral, cytotoxic, hypoglycaemic, and leukopenic. As well, the bioactive components can be extracted from the plant material using environmentally benign solvents that allow for both food and industrial end-uses. The favorable worldwide distribution of sumac also suggests that desirable bioproducts may be obtained at source, with minimal transportation requirements from the source through processing to end consumer. However, previous work has focussed on only a few members of this large plant family. In addition, not all of the species studied to date have been fully characterized for potential bioactive components and bioactivities. Thus, there remains a significant research gap spanning the range from lead chemical discovery through process development and optimization in order to better understand the full potential of the Rhus genus as part of global green technology based bioproduct and bioprocess research programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature PrecedingsSame topicMedicinal Plant ResearchFrench-language works237,207