MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077101408 · doi:10.1021/jf2035466

Proanthocyanidin-rich Extracts from Cranberry Fruit (Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.) Selectively Inhibit the Growth of Human Pathogenic Fungi Candida spp. and Cryptococcus neoformans

2011· article· en· W2077101408 on OpenAlexaff
Kunal Patel, Frank J. Scarano, Miwako Kondo, Robert A. R. Hurta, Catherine Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptococcus neoformansProanthocyanidinMicrobiologyBroth microdilutionCandida kruseiBiologyMinimum inhibitory concentrationVacciniumCandida glabrataCandida albicansAntimicrobialPolyphenolBiochemistryBotanyCandida tropicalisAntioxidant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cranberry ( Vaccinium macrocarpon ) has been shown in clinical studies to reduce infections caused by Escherichia coli and other bacteria, and proanthocyanidins are believed to play a role. The ability of cranberry to inhibit the growth of opportunistic human fungal pathogens that cause oral, skin, respiratory, and systemic infections has not been well-studied. Fractions from whole cranberry fruit were screened for inhibition of five Candida species and Cryptococcus neoformans , a causative agent of fungal meningitis. Candida glabrata , Candida lusitaniae , Candida krusei , and Cryptococcus neoformans showed significant susceptibility to treatment with cranberry proanthocyanidin fractions in a broth microdilution assay, with minimum inhibitory concentrations as low as 1 μg/mL. MALDI-TOF MS analysis of subfractions detected epicatechin oligomers of up to 12 degrees of polymerization. Those containing larger oligomers caused the strongest inhibition. This study suggests that cranberry has potential as an antifungal agent.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207