Identification, isolation and characterization of the antifeedant constituent of <i>Clausena anisata</i> against <i>Helicoverpa armigera</i> (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hexane, petroleum ether, chloroform, ethyl acetate, methanol and water extracts of Clausena anisata[(Willd.) Hook F. Ex Benth] leaves and roots were evaluated against Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) for antifeedant activities. Antifeedant activity was confirmed, and was found to be higher in root extracts than those of the leaf. Chloroform and petroleum ether extracts of the root showed strongest antifeedant activities (DC50s [concentration (C) causing 50% deterrence compared with the control] 0.014% and 0.016% respectively), and root extracts were fractionated using silica gel column chromatography. One fraction of the chloroform and one of the petroleum ether root extracts was active; and on the basis of mass spectroscopy and 1H and 13C nuclear magnetic resonance spectral data, the active compounds in the two fractions were confirmed to be identical, and identified as osthol [2H‐1‐Benzopyran‐2‐one, 7‐methoxy‐8‐(3‐methyl‐2‐butenyl)]. The highest concentration of osthol was found in the chloroform root extract. Antifeedant activities of the root extracts, as measured by DC50 values, were highly correlated with their osthol contents. Approximately 99% of the variation in bioactivity of the root extracts could be accounted for by variation in osthol content; osthol therefore, appeared to be an antifeedant component of C. anisata to H. armigera. This may provide a new approach to managing this pest.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".