Isolation and fast analysis of phytochemical constituents in Echinacea species and Rhodiola rosea L. using high-speed counter-current chromatography and ultra fast liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-speed counter-current chromatography was used for the purification of phytochemical components from the roots of Echinacea angustifolia (DC.) Hell and Rhodiola rosea L. Five alkylamides were purified from Echinacea angustifolia roots using two solvent systems and seven phenylalkanoid and monoterpene glycosides were isolated from Rhodiola rosea roots using one solvent system and semi-preparative HPLC. Fast analytical methods were developed for the identification of alkylamides in Echinacea roots and commercial products available in the Canadian marketplace. 24 alkylamides were identified in 15 minutes using ultra-fast liquid chromatography with diode array and mass spectrometric detection. The three major alkylamides obtained by HSCCC were used as quantitative standards to determine alkylamide contents in different products. Also, a 22 minute method using UFLC-DAD-MS was developed for the characterization of 27 components in Rhodiola rosea roots. These techniques can be used in quality and authenticity control of natural health products containing Echinacea and Rhodiola rosea.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it