Recent development in mass spectrometry and its hyphenated techniques for the analysis of medicinal plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Medicinal plants are gaining increasing attention worldwide due to their empirical therapeutic efficacy and being a huge natural compound pool for new drug discovery and development. The efficacy, safety and quality of medicinal plants are the main concerns, which are highly dependent on the comprehensive analysis of chemical components in the medicinal plants. With the advances in mass spectrometry (MS) techniques, comprehensive analysis and fast identification of complex phytochemical components have become feasible, and may meet the needs, for the analysis of medicinal plants. OBJECTIVE: Our aim is to provide an overview on the latest developments in MS and its hyphenated technique and their applications for the comprehensive analysis of medicinal plants. METHODOLOGY: Application of various MS and its hyphenated techniques for the analysis of medicinal plants, including but not limited to one-dimensional chromatography, multiple-dimensional chromatography coupled to MS, ambient ionisation MS, and mass spectral database, have been reviewed and compared in this work. RESULTS: Recent advancs in MS and its hyphenated techniques have made MS one of the most powerful tools for the analysis of complex extracts from medicinal plants due to its excellent separation and identification ability, high sensitivity and resolution, and wide detection dynamic range. CONCLUSION: To achieve high-throughput or multi-dimensional analysis of medicinal plants, the state-of-the-art MS and its hyphenated techniques have played, and will continue to play a great role in being the major platform for their further research in order to obtain insight into both their empirical therapeutic efficacy and quality control.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".