MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038474223 · doi:10.1007/s11745-001-0703-y

Fatty acid composition of lipids present in selected lichenized fungi: A chemotyping study

2001· article· en· W2038474223 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guilherme L. Sassaki, Leonardo M. Cruz, Philip A.J. Gorin, Marcello Iacomini

Bibliographic record

VenueLipids · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsLipidologyClinical chemistryComposition (language)Food scienceChemistryLichenFatty acidBotanyBiologyBiochemistryArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The total-lipid composition of 21 lichens of the ascomycetous genera Cladonia (11) and Cladina (1) of the family Cladoniacea, Cladia (1), Parmotrema (3), Ramalina (2), Leptogium (1), Cetraria (1), and the basidiomycetous genus Dictyonema (1) was determined. Analyses of those of Dictyonema glabratum were carried out with a total extract and those obtained after successive extractions with various solvents. Each extract was partitioned between n-heptane/isopropanol and 1 M sulfuric acid, giving triglycerides (TG) in the upper phase. Extracts were methanolyzed and the resulting methyl esters were analyzed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Methanolyzates of TG unexpectedly contained esters of 9-oxodecanoic, 9-methyl-tetradecanoic, 6-methyl-tetradecanoic, 3-hydroxy-decanoic, nonanedioic, and decanedioic acids, as well as common fatty acids. Fatty acid methyl ester profiles from the lichens were submitted to cluster analysis, and the resulting dendogram showed a cluster consistent with Cladonia spp., suggesting an efficient aid to lichen taxonomy. The total carbohydrate content of each lipid extract was determined by a modified phenol-sulfuric acid method, which compensated for the presence of pigments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLipidsSame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207