MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135913869 · doi:10.1080/13880200500406354

<i>Echinacea purpurea</i>. Aerial Parts Contain Multiple Antiviral Compounds

2005· article· en· W2135913869 on OpenAlexaff
Selvarani Vimalanathan, Linda Kang, Virginie Treyvaud Amiguet, John F. Livesey, J. T. Arnason, Jim Hudson

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerbal Medicine Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEchinacea (animal)Traditional medicineAsteraceaeEthyl acetateLupeolPharmacognosyBiologyVirusHerpes simplex virusChemistryBotanyBiological activityIn vitroBiochemistryVirologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stems, leaves, and flowers of Echinacea purpurea. (L.) Moench (Heliantheae: Asteraceae) were fractionated by various solvents and the fractions evaluated for antiviral activity in relation to chemical composition and distribution within the plant. All of the aqueous fractions contained potent activity against herpes simplex virus and influenza virus. However, although some of this activity could be attributed to polysaccharide and cichoric acid components, their individual contributions could not account for the total antiviral activity; other potent antivirals must be present. In addition, the ethanol- and ethyl acetate–soluble fractions from leaves and stem contained an uncharacterized but potent antiviral photosensitizer, which was absent from the flower extract. None of the fractions, however, contained anti-rhinovirus activity. Thus, part of the alleged benefits of Echinacea purpurea. extracts can be attributed to the presence of anti-influenza and anti-HSV compounds, and some of these activities are likely to be present in various commercial tinctures, teas, capsules, and tablets.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations68
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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