MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988850473 · doi:10.3390/toxins11110634

Trichothecenes in Cereal Grains – An Update

2019· review· en· W2988850473 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrichotheceneFusariumMycotoxinBiologyHypocrealesVomitoxinCereal grainChemotypeBiotechnologyBotanyFood scienceAscomycotaGeneGeneticsEssential oil

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trichothecenes are sesquiterpenoid mycotoxins produced by fungi from the order Hypocreales, including members of the Fusarium genus that infect cereal grain crops. Different trichothecene-producing Fusarium species and strains have different trichothecene chemotypes belonging to the Type A and B class. These fungi cause a disease of small grain cereals, called Fusarium head blight, and their toxins contaminate host tissues. As potent inhibitors of eukaryotic protein synthesis, trichothecenes pose a health risk to human and animal consumers of infected cereal grains. In 2009, Foroud and Eudes published a review of trichothecenes in cereal grains for human consumption. As an update to this review, the work herein provides a comprehensive and multi-disciplinary review of the Fusarium trichothecenes covering topics in chemistry and biochemistry, pathogen biology, trichothecene toxicity, molecular mechanisms of resistance or detoxification, genetics of resistance and breeding strategies to reduce their contamination of wheat and barley.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.227 · 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