Antibacterial Activity study of Musizin isolated from Rhamnus wightii Wight & Arn.
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
The crude extracts and the compounds isolated from traditional medicinal plants are used to treat infectious diseases caused by bacteria, fungi, and viruses. An attempt has been made in the present investigation to evaluate the antibacterial activity of musizin isolated from Rhamnus wightii, (Family: Rhamnaceae) against Gram-positive (Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus faecalis), and Gram negative (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumonia, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) bacteria. The tested compound showed more pronounced antibacterial activity against the tested pathogens than the standard antibiotics like streptomycin and gentamycin with the lowest minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Molecular docking analysis was performed to study the effectiveness of musizin compared to the standard antibiotics; it showed a significant interaction with the target proteins such asalgR (P. arginosa), divIVA (E. faecalis), icaA (S. aureus), plcR(B. cereus), treC (K. pneumonia) and ftsl (E. coli) and found that musizin showed higher potential with least binding energy. It has also been found that musizin had better ADMET properties than the standard drugs. Thus, musizin acts as an inhibitor of bacterial growth for consideration as a drug to treat bacterial infections.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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