MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794483648 · doi:10.5539/ijc.v10n2p10

Constituents and Anthelmintic Activity Evaluation of Albizia Adiantifolia (Schumach) W.F. Wright Essential Oils FromNigeria

2018· article· en· W2794483648 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akinsola Akande, Sherifat Aboaba, Guido Flamini

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCaryophylleneBark (sound)SesquiterpeneAlbiziaHumuleneEssential oilTraditional medicineTerpeneAnthelminticBotanyHorticultureChromatographyOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Albizia adiantifolia (Schumach) W.F. Wright (Fabaceae) is a plant used traditionally in treating different health ailments which includes worm infections. The essential oils (EOs) were obtained by hydrodistillation in an all glass Clevenger apparatus, and characterized by gas chromatography (GC) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis (GC-MS). In vitro petri-dish anthelmintic activity was carried out using adult earthworm, Eudrilus eugeniae. The leaves, stem bark and root bark EOs afforded a total of 40, 26 and 20 constituents representing 90.9%, 94.1% and 90.9% of the total oil fractions respectively. The classes of compounds identified in the leaves, stem bark and root bark are oxygenated monoterpenes (4.1%, 1.7% and 4.0% respectively), sesquiterpene hydrocarbons (39.5%, 67.3% and 42.6% respectively), oxygenated sesquiterpenes (18.7%, 22.3% and 30.1% respectively), non-terpene derivatives (12.1%, 2.6% and 14.2% respectively) and apocarotenoids (16.5% and 0.2% in the leaves and stem-bark). β-caryophyllene (23.0%), E-geranylacetone (7.4%), acorenone (6.4%), viridiflorol (6.4%), α-zingiberene (6.3%) and ar-curcumene (4.6%) were the major constituents in the leaves oil, β-caryophyllene (39.3%), selin-11-en-4-α-ol (10.4%), α-zingiberene (9.6%), ar-curcumene (7.2%), caryophyllene oxide (6.4%) and α-humulene (5.6%) were the major constituents in the stem bark oil, while β-caryophyllene (32.1%), selin-11-en-4-α-ol (13.1%), caryophyllene oxide (8.4%), pentadecanal (6.1%) and α -humulene (4.4%) were the major constituents in the root bark oil. β -caryophyllene dominated the oils. The leaf EO was the most active against E. eugeniae worm. All the oils showed a relatively higher activity compared to Albendazole, in a concentration dependent manner. There was significant difference (p<0.001) in activity.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ChemistrySame topicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFrench-language works237,207