MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507753603 · doi:10.1039/c6fo01018k

Heracleum orphanidis: chemical characterisation, and comparative evaluation of antioxidant and antimicrobial activities with specific interest in the influence on Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1

2016· article· en· W2507753603 on OpenAlexaff
Ksenija S. Mileski, Ana Ćirić, Snežana Trifunović, Mihailo Ristić, Marina Sokóvić, Vlado Matevski, Vele Tešević, Milka Jadranin, Petar D. Marin, Ana M. Džamić

Bibliographic record

VenueFood & Function · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPseudomonas aeruginosaAntimicrobialAntioxidantChemistryMicrobiologyBiologyBiochemistryBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

GC-FID and GC-MS were used to determine the chemical composition of the essential oil of the aerial parts of Heracleum orphanidis Boiss. Also, the HPLC-DAD/ESI-ToF-MS profile of the methanol extracts of aerial parts and roots was determined. The main components of the essential oil were n-octanol, octyl hexanoate and n-octyl acetate, while coumarins were the most prevalent compounds in methanol extracts. An evaluation of antioxidant activity showed that the methanol and aqueous extracts of the aerial parts had the highest potential. In terms of antimicrobial activity determined by microdilution assays, the essential oil and methanol extract of the roots showed the greatest effectiveness. The colonies of Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 treated with H. orphanidis samples produced less toxic pyocyanin, showed lower twitching and flagella mobility and biofilm formatting was reduced. The analyses in this study showed the considerable biological potential of H. orphanidis considering free radicals and various pathogenic strains, including the wild type of P. aeruginosa.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood & FunctionSame topicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityFrench-language works237,207