MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899995442 · doi:10.3390/molecules23112899

Benzylisoquinoline Alkaloids Biosynthesis in Sacred Lotus

2018· review· en· W2899995442 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivette M. Menéndez‐Perdomo, Peter J. Facchini

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChromatography in Natural Products
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsBenzylisoquinolineLotusAporphineAlkaloidBiologyCorydalisBiosynthesisBotanyTraditional medicineStereochemistryChemistryBiochemistryEnzymeTraditional Chinese medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gaertn.) is an ancient aquatic plant used throughout Asia for its nutritional and medicinal properties. Benzylisoquinoline alkaloids (BIAs), mostly within the aporphine and bisbenzylisoquinoline structural categories, are among the main bioactive constituents in the plant. The alkaloids of sacred lotus exhibit promising anti-cancer, anti-arrhythmic, anti-HIV, and anti-malarial properties. Despite their pharmacological significance, BIA metabolism in this non-model plant has not been extensively investigated. In this review, we examine the diversity of BIAs in sacred lotus, with an emphasis on the distinctive stereochemistry of alkaloids found in this species. Additionally, we discuss our current understanding of the biosynthetic genes and enzymes involved in the formation of 1-benzylisoquinoline, aporphine, and bisbenzylisoquinoline alkaloids in the plant. We conclude that a comprehensive functional characterization of alkaloid biosynthetic enzymes using both in vitro and in vivo methods is required to advance our limited knowledge of BIA metabolism in the sacred lotus.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations66
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicChromatography in Natural ProductsFrench-language works237,207