The Plant Extract Collection Kiel in Schleswig-Holstein (PECKISH) Is an Open Access Screening Library
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because plants and their extracts are a potent resource for bioactive substances we developed the plant extract collection Kiel in Schleswig-Holstein (PECKISH) as an open access screening library. PECKISH contains more than 4500 unique aqueous (about 64%), ethanolic (about 32%), and other (about 4%) extracts from > 880 different plant species and 11 different plant tissues. PECKISH represents about 190 plant families. Extracts were obtained from health shops, outdoor cultivated plants, marine algae, herbs from traditional Chinese medicine, African plants and known medicinal plants. Concentrated and sterilized extracts are stored at -80 °C and are available in a 96-well plate format including empty wells for positive and negative controls. The library format allows medium throughput screenings using enzymatic assays, cell-based assays or phenotypic read-outs using model-organisms such asC. elegans or D. melanogaster. Screenings based on PECKISH are useful to develop dietary supplements, functional foods or drugs. The uniqueness of PECKISH lies in its broad diversity of plant extracts and its open access character.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.059 |
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".