MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945936270 · doi:10.1080/21501203.2019.1620892

The study of antimicrobial, anti-cancer, anti-inflammatory and α-glucosidase inhibitory activities of Nigronapthaphenyl, isolated from an extract of <i>Nigrospora sphaerica</i>

2019· review· en· W2945936270 on OpenAlexaff
Kushan M. Ukwatta, Jennifer L. Lawrence, Champika Dilrukshi Wijayarathna

Bibliographic record

VenueMycology&#58 An International Journal on Fungal Biology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMicrobial Natural Products and Biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Colombo
KeywordsBacillus cereusCytotoxicityAntimicrobialChemistryBacillus subtilisIC50Anti-inflammatoryAntibacterial activityMinimum inhibitory concentrationTraditional medicineStereochemistryMicrobiologyIn vitroBiochemistryBacteriaBiologyPharmacologyOrganic chemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new compound, nigronapthaphenyl, was extracted from the endophytic fungus Nigrospora sphaerica isolated from a mangrove plant Bruguiera gymnorrhyza. The structure of the compound was elucidated by analysis of 1D and 2D NMR spectra and mass spectrometric data. It was tested in vitro for its antimicrobial activity, cytotoxicity, anti-inflammatory activity and for its ability to inhibit α-glucosidase. Nigronapthaphenyl showed antibacterial activities against Bacillus subtilis TISTR 088 and Bacillus cereus TISTR 688 with MIC values of 4 and 2 μg/mL respectively. Cytotoxicity against colon cancer cell line HCT 116 was found to be an IC50 value of 9.62 ± 0.5 μM . This further showed potential anti-inflammatory activity amounting to an IC50 of 6.2 ± 0.5 μM and also α-glucosidase inhibitory activity, with an IC50 value of 6.9 ± 0.5 μM.

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 score0.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMycology&#58 An International Journal on Fungal BiologySame topicMicrobial Natural Products and BiosynthesisFrench-language works237,207