MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897193800 · doi:10.1080/13880209.2018.1501583

<i>Echinacea</i> biotechnology: advances, commercialization and future considerations

2018· review· en· W2897193800 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica L. Parsons, Stewart I. Cameron, Cory S. Harris, Myron L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical Biology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerbal Medicine Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEchinacea (animal)CommercializationContext (archaeology)BiotechnologyTraditional medicineBiologyMedicineBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Plants of the genus Echinacea (Asteraceae) are among the most popular herbal supplements on the market today. Recent studies indicate there are potential new applications and emerging markets for this natural health product (NHP). OBJECTIVE: This review aims to synthesize recent developments in Echinacea biotechnology and to identify promising applications for these advances in the industry. METHODS: A comprehensive survey of peer-reviewed publications was carried out, focusing on Echinacea biotechnology and impacts on phytochemistry. This article primarily covers research findings since 2007 and builds on earlier reviews on the biotechnology of Echinacea. RESULTS: Bioreactors, genetic engineering and controlled biotic or abiotic elicitation have the potential to significantly improve the yield, consistency and overall quality of Echinacea products. Using these technologies, a variety of new applications for Echinacea can be realized, such as the use of seed oil and antimicrobial and immune boosting feed additives for livestock. CONCLUSIONS: New applications can take advantage of the well-established popularity of Echinacea as a NHP. Echinacea presents a myriad of potential health benefits, including anti-inflammatory, anxiolytic and antibiotic activities that have yet to be fully translated into new applications. The distinct chemistry and bioactivity of different Echinacea species and organs, moreover, can lead to interesting and diverse commercial opportunities.

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)0.001
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations46
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceutical BiologySame topicHerbal Medicine Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207