MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064284871 · doi:10.1002/cbic.200700470

The Search for Novel Human Pancreatic α‐Amylase Inhibitors: High‐Throughput Screening of Terrestrial and Marine Natural Product Extracts

2008· article· en· W2064284871 on OpenAlexafffund
Chris A. Tarling, Kate Woods, Ran Zhang, Harry C. Brastianos, Gary D. Brayer, Raymond J. Andersen, Stephen G. Withers

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNatural productChemistryNon-competitive inhibitionMyricetinBiochemistryEnzymeAmylaseBioassayFlavonolsBiologyAntioxidantQuercetin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Specific inhibitors of human pancreatic alpha-amylase (HPA) have potential as oral agents for the control of blood glucose levels in the treatment of diabetes and obesity. In a search for novel inhibitors, a library of 30 000 crude biological extracts of terrestrial and marine origin has been screened. A number of inhibitory extracts were identified, of which the most potent was subjected to bioassay-guided purification. A family of three glycosylated acyl flavonols, montbretins A-C, was thereby identified and characterized as competitive amylase inhibitors, with K(i) values ranging from 8.1-6100 nM. Competitive inhibition by myricetin, which corresponds to the flavone core, and noncompetitive inhibition by a second fragment, ethyl caffeiate, suggest a binding mode for these inhibitors.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations188
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesFrench-language works237,207