Bioactivity, proximate, mineral and volatile profiles along the flowering stages of Opuntia microdasys (Lehm.): defining potential applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Opuntia spp. flowers have been traditionally used for medical purposes, mostly because of their diversity in bioactive molecules with health promoting properties. The proximate, mineral and volatile compound profiles, together with the cytotoxic and antimicrobial properties were characterized in O. microdasys flowers at different maturity stages, revealing several statistically significant differences. O. microdasys stood out mainly for its high contents of dietary fiber, potassium and camphor, and its high activities against HCT15 cells, Staphylococcus aureus, Aspergillus versicolor and Penicillium funiculosum. The vegetative stage showed the highest cytotoxic and antifungal activities, whilst the full flowering stage was particularly active against bacterial species. The complete dataset has been classified by principal component analysis, achieving clearly identifiable groups for each flowering stage, elucidating also the most distinctive features, and comprehensively profiling each of the assayed stages. The results might be useful to define the best flowering stage considering practical application purposes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".