Microbial Reactions on 7<i>α</i>‐Hydroxyfrullanolide and Evaluation of Biotransformed Products for Antibacterial Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
7alpha-Hydroxyfrullanolide (1), a known sesquiterpenoid, was isolated from Sphaeranthus indicus using an antibacterial-activity-directed fractionation method. This compound had exhibited a significant antibacterial activity against Gram-positive bacteria. Chemical and microbial reactions were performed to prepare eight different analogues of compound 1 in order to evaluate these newly synthesized compounds for antibacterial activity. These compounds were 1beta,7alpha-dihydroxyfrullanolide (2), 7alpha-hydroxy-1-oxofrullanolide (3), 4,5-dihydro-7alpha-hydroxyfrullanolide (4), 11,13-dihydro-7alpha-hydroxyfrullanolide (5), 13-acetyl-7alpha-hydroxyfrullanolide (6), 2alpha,7alpha-dihydroxysphaerantholide (7), 4alpha,5alpha-epoxy-7alpha-hydroxyfrullanolide (8), and 4beta,5beta-epoxy-7alpha-hydroxyfrullanolide (9). Microbial reactions on 1 using whole-cell cultures of Cunninghamella echinulata and Curvularia lunata yielded compounds 2-4. Incubation of compound 1 with the liquid cultures of Apsergillus niger and Rhizopus circinans yielded metabolites 5-7, while 8 and 9 were prepared by carrying out an epoxidation reaction on 1 using meta-chloroperbenzoic acid (mCPBA). Structures of compounds 2-9 were elucidated with the aid of extensive NMR spectral studies. Compounds 2-4 were found to be new metabolites. Compounds 1-9 were evaluated for antibacterial activity and found to exhibit a wide range of bioactivities. Antibacterial-activity data of 1-9 suggested that the bioactivity of 1 is largely due to the presence of C4=C5, C11=C13, and a gamma-lactone moiety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".