Antiproliferative, Immunostimulatory, and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Extracts Derived from Mushrooms Collected in Haida Gwaii, British Columbia (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild mushrooms, while largely explored for their ecological significance, have not been systematically studied for their medicinal properties. This is the first report of biological activities of mushrooms from Haida Gwaii, British Columbia, Canada. The 17 mushroom species in this study were collected from multiple locations on Haida Gwaii and were screened for antiproliferative, immunostimulatory, and anti-inflammatory activities. Prior to screening, mushrooms were genetically identified and then sequentially fractionated into four crude extracts using 80% ethanol, 50% methanol, water, and 5% sodium hydroxide. We report here the strong antiproliferative and antiinflammatory activities of Amanita augusta, Phellodon atratus, Guepinia helvelloides, Chroogomphus tomentosus, Laetiporus conifericola, and Inocybe sp. In addition, A. augusta, G. helvelloides, and Inocybe sp. showed potent immunostimulatory activity. Two other species (Ganoderma tsugae and Pleurotus ostreatus) displayed strong immunostimulatory activity consistent with previous reports by others, suggesting that similar constituents are present in the same species from Haida Gwaii. For nine species (Russula paludosa, Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca, Tricholomopsis rutilans, Tyromyces chioneus, Hydnum repandum, Hypholoma fasciculare, Clavulina cinerea, P. ostreatus and Ramaria cystidiophora), we describe antiproliferative, immunostimulatory, and/or anti-inflammatory activities that have never been reported before. The new findings serve as a platform for future investigations into the potentially novel bioactive constituents of these mushrooms, as well as an incentive to further study a wider array of wild mushrooms for medicinal properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".