Phytochemistry of Wild Populations of <i>Panax quinquefolius</i> L. (North American Ginseng)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of the phytochemistry of Panax quinquefolius L. (North American ginseng) collected from wild populations in Ontario, Quebec, Maine, Vermont, and Wisconsin was undertaken. Reverse-phase HPLC was used to determine the natural variation of levels of ginsenosides Rg1, Re, Rf, Rb1, Rc, Rb2, and Rd and their total in leaf, stem, and root of authentic wild-grown material. The totals in roots varied from 1 to 16%, with the greatest number of individual samples having 4-5% total ginsenosides. The lack of ginsenoside Rf in roots of authentic wild populations confirmed its status as a phytochemical marker differentiating American and Asian ginseng. Ten geographically isolated wild populations were collected, and several showed significant variation in the levels of major ginsenosides. There was no statistical difference in mean ginsenoside content between wild and cultivated P. quinquefolius roots at 4 years of age, suggesting there is no phytochemical justification for wild crafting. Baseline data on total ginsenoside levels for authentic wild P. quinquefolius reported here provide reference levels for quality assurance 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 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".