MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097084416 · doi:10.1076/phbi.41.6.412.17828

Antifungal and Anti-inflammatory Activity of the Genus Echinacea

2003· article· en· W2097084416 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Merali, Shannon E. Binns, M. Paulin-Levasseur, Christine Ficker, Myron L. Smith, Bernard R. Baum, Ernesto A. Brovelli, John T. Arnason

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerbal Medicine Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyEchinacea (animal)MicrobiologyTraditional medicineCandida albicansMicrosporum gypseumAmphotericin BCryptococcus neoformansTrichophytonAntifungalMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The antifungal activity and 5-lipoxygenase-inhibiting activity of extracts of five wild and three commercially used taxa of the genus Echinacea were investigated. The near-UV mediated antifungal bioassays included clinically isolated Cryptococcus neoformans, two Candida albicans isolates (D10 and CN1A) with amphotericin B resistance, as well as established and emerging filamentous fungal pathogens (Trichophyton tonsurans, T. mentagrophytes, Microsporum gypseum and Pseudallescheria boydii). Root extracts of the eight Echinacea taxa showed antifungal activity against most of the pathogenic fungi. The inhibition of the 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX) enzyme of the arachadonic acid pathway was determined by HPLC detection of a direct metabolic product (LTB 4) of 5-LOX derived from stimulated rat basophilic cells. Root extracts of the three commercial species of Echinacea (E. purpurea, E. pallida var. angustifolia, E. pallida var. pallida) inhibited the 5-LOX enzyme. E. pallida var. angustifolia was the most potent of the three. The results show that Echinacea spp: have significant antifungal and antiinflammatory activity.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations56
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceutical BiologySame topicHerbal Medicine Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207