MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883722779 · doi:10.1002/ptr.6157

Ethnobotany of the genus <i>Taraxacum</i>—Phytochemicals and antimicrobial activity

2018· review· en· W2883722779 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Sharifi‐Rad, Thomas H. Roberts, Karl R. Matthews, Camila Fonseca Bezerra, Maria Flaviana Bezerra Morais‐Braga, Henrique Douglas Melo Coutinho, Farukh Sharopov, Bahare Salehi, Zubaida Yousaf, Majid Sharifi‐Rad, María del Mar Contreras, Elena Maria Varoni, Deepa Verma, Marcello Iriti, Javad Sharifi‐Rad

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytotherapy Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Toxicity and Pharmacological Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobialTraditional medicineBiologyTerpenoidDandelionPhytochemicalBotanyMicrobiologyMedicineTraditional Chinese medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plants belonging to the genus Taraxacum have been used in traditional healthcare to treat infectious diseases including food-borne infections. This review aims to summarize the available information on Taraxacum spp., focusing on plant cultivation, ethnomedicinal uses, bioactive phytochemicals, and antimicrobial properties. Phytochemicals present in Taraxacum spp. include sesquiterpene lactones, such as taraxacin, mongolicumin B, and taraxinic acid derivatives; triterpenoids, such as taraxasterol, taraxerol, and officinatrione; and phenolic derivatives, such as hydroxycinnamic acids (chlorogenic, chicoric, and caffeoyltartaric acids), coumarins (aesculin and cichoriin), lignans (mongolicumin A), and taraxacosides. Aqueous and organic extracts of different plant parts exhibit promising in vitro antimicrobial activity relevant for controlling fungi and Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Therefore, this genus represents a potential source of bioactive phytochemicals with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. However, so far, preclinical evidence for these activities has not been fully substantiated by clinical studies. Indeed, clinical evidence for the activity of Taraxacum bioactive compounds is still scant, at least for infectious diseases, and there is limited information on oral bioavailability, pharmacological activities, and safety of Taraxacum products in humans, though their traditional uses would suggest that these plants are safe.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations124
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytotherapy ResearchSame topicPlant Toxicity and Pharmacological PropertiesFrench-language works237,207