MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479739082 · doi:10.1021/bk-2003-0860.ch009

Supercritical Fluid Extraction of Bioactive Components from St. John's Wort (<i>Hypericum perforatum</i> L.) and <i>Ginkgo biloba</i>

2003· book-chapter· en· W2479739082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mari Mannila, Qingyong Lang, Chien M. Wai, Yanyan Cui, C.Y.W. ANG

Bibliographic record

VenueACS symposium series · 2003
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGinkgo biloba and Cashew Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGinkgolidesHyperforinGinkgo bilobaSupercritical fluid extractionSupercritical fluidChemistryHypericum perforatumExtraction (chemistry)ChromatographySolventOrganic chemistryTraditional medicineBotanyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) offers an attractive alternative to solvent-based methods for extraction and manufacturing of herbal products. In addition to being a "green" solvent, supercritical CO2 can also be selective for extraction and separation of active ingredients from certain herbs. The main active constituents in St. John's wort are hyperforin and adhyperforin, which can be effectively extracted with neat CO2 under mild conditions (30 °C and 80 atm). Furthermore, extraction of hyperforin and adhyperforin from St. John's wort with neat CO2 is selective, resulting in a fairly enriched and stable extract of these compounds. A successful supercritical CO2 extraction of terpene trilactones (bilobalide and ginkgolides A, B and C) from Ginkgo biloba leaves can be achieved at an elevated temperature (100 °C) and high pressure (350 atm; 0.72 g/ml density) with a small amount of ethanol/acetic acid (9:1) as a modifier. SFE of bilobalide and ginkgolides under these conditions resulted in an approximately 10% higher yield compared with traditional solvent based extractions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS symposium seriesSame topicGinkgo biloba and Cashew ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207