MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Variações diárias, sazonais e intraespecíficas em Piper solmsianum

2008· dissertation· pt· W2104664721 on OpenAlexaff
João Homero do Amaral

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPiperaceae Chemical and Biological Studies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHorticultureBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crude extracts of seven individuals of Piper solmsianum collected in different places were analyzed by high efficiency liquid chromatography (HPLC) in order to determine changes in the relative content of apiol, dillapiol, myristicin, grandisin, elemicin, isoelemicin, and tetrahydrofuran lignan rel-(7R,8R,7′R,8′R)-3,4,3′,4′dimethylenedioxy-5,5′-dimethoxy-7,7′-epoxylignan.All chromatographic profiles consisted of two, three or four major peaks with significant qualitative and quantitative differences.Major components were different from plant to plant and in one specimen an component different from the seven metabolites observed in most cases.The leaf extracts from three wild specimens of P. solmsianum collected at CUASO Reserve, showed annual and diurnal variations in apiol/dillapiol and grandisin relative concentrations.Three plants presented circadian variation with maximum content of grandisin late afternoon, and minimum content in the dawn.Apiol/dillapiol displayed clear circadian variation in two individuals, but without synchrony between phases.The maximum content was observed and in a second specimen around 8 p.m., and in the another specimen, the maximum content occur was observed at 5 a.m.The seasonal variation showed small amplitude of oscillation and in two individuals the maxima contents of apiol/dillapiol and grandisin were observed in summer.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPiperaceae Chemical and Biological StudiesFrench-language works237,207