MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096550845 · doi:10.1002/cbdv.201400055

A New DNA‐Intercalative Cytotoxic Allylic Xanthone from <i>Swertia corymbosa</i>

2015· article· en· W2096550845 on OpenAlexaff
Chokkalingam Uvarani, K Arumugasamy, Kumarasamy Chandraprakash, Mathan Sankaran, Athar Ata, Palathurai Subramaniam Mohan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry & Biodiversity · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytochemistry and Biological Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryHeLaXanthonePhytochemicalStereochemistryBovine serum albuminCytotoxic T cellAntioxidantBiochemistryCellIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phytochemical investigation of the CHCl3 fraction of Swertia corymbosa resulted in the isolation of a new 3-allyl-2,8-dihydroxy-1,6-dimethoxy-9H-xanthen-9-one (1), along with four known xanthones, gentiacaulein (3), norswertianin (4), 1,3,6,8-tetrahydroxyxanthone (5), and 1,3-dihydroxyxanthone (6). Structure of compound 1 was elucidated with the aid of IR, UV, NMR, and MS data, and chemical transformation via new allyloxy xanthone derivative (2). Compounds 1-6 exhibited various levels of antioxidant and anti-α-glucosidase activities. Absorption and fluorescence spectroscopic studies on 1-6 indicated that these compounds could interact with calf thymus DNA (CT-DNA) through intercalation and with bovine serum albumin (BSA) in a static quenching process. Compound 1 was found to be significantly cytotoxic against human cancer cell lines HeLa, HCT116, and AGS, and weakly active against normal NIH 3T3 cell line.

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)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry & BiodiversitySame topicPhytochemistry and Biological ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207