MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The local anesthetic activity of <i>Aconitum</i> alkaloids can be explained by their structural properties: a QSAR analysis

2004· article· en· W1986878939 on OpenAlexaff
Angélica M. Bello, Alejandro A. Nava‐Ocampo

Bibliographic record

VenueFundamental and Clinical Pharmacology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPlant-based Medicinal Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAconitumAnestheticQuantitative structure–activity relationshipChemistryLocal anestheticAlkaloidStereochemistryReactivity (psychology)AnesthesiaMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alkaloids isolated from Aconitum roots exhibit anesthetic effects at peripheral nerves. We performed the present quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) analysis in order to understand the mechanism of action as local anesthetics of 11 Aconitum alkaloids. The alkaloids with the highest anesthetic activity had an aroyl/aroyloxy group at R14 position while the weaker anesthetic alkaloids had the aroyloxy group at R4. The stable compounds exhibited a higher local anesthetic activity than the unstable compounds. In relation to the reactivity indexes of atoms on the aromatic ring, C2' was more reactive while C3' and C5' were less reactive in the compounds with the highest anesthetic activity. Reactivity of N, C1', C4' and C6' was similar between the two groups of alkaloids. The pKa was approximately 7.3 in both groups. The local anesthetic ED50 of alkaloids was significantly inversely related to molecular weight, core-core repulsion energy, steric energy and RI-C2', and directly related to electronic energy, total energy, RI-C5' and to the heat of formation. In conclusion, we identified a set of structural parameters that are related to the local anesthetic activity of Aconitum alkaloids. Our findings are useful to understand the mechanism of action of these alkaloids and to provide a rational for chemical manipulation of the compounds in order to obtain potent derivates with minor toxicity.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFundamental and Clinical PharmacologySame topicPlant-based Medicinal ResearchFrench-language works237,207