Phytochemical Comparison of the Water and Ethanol Leaf Extracts of the Cree medicinal plant, Sarracenia purpurea L. (Sarraceniaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Cree of Eeyou Istchee in Northern Quebec identified Sarracenia purpurea L. as an important plant for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes. Traditionally the plant is used as a decoction (boiling water extract) of the leaf, however, in order to study the extract in a laboratory setting, an 80% ethanol extract was used. In this study, the phytochemistry of both extracts of the leaves was compared and quantified. METHODS: Two S. purpurea leaf extracts were prepared, one a traditional hot water extract and the other an 80% ethanol extract. Using UPLC-ESI-MS, the extracts were phytochemically compared for 2 triterpenes, betulinic acid and ursolic acid, using one gradient method and for 10 additional substances, including the actives quercetin-3-O-galactoside and morroniside, using a different method. RESULTS: The concentrations of the nine phenolic substances present, as well as an active principle, the iridoid glycoside morroniside, were very similar between the two extracts, with generally slightly higher concentrations of phenolics in the ethanol extract as expected. However, two triterpenes, betulinic acid and ursolic acid, were 107 and 93 times more concentrated, respectively, in the ethanol extract compared to the water extract. CONCLUSION: The main phytochemical markers and most importantly the antidiabetic active principles, quercetin-3-O-galactoside and morroniside, were present in similar amounts in the two extracts, which predicts similar bioactivity.This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".