Quantitative Evaluation of a Mexican and a Ghanaian <i>Tabernaemontana</i> Species as Alternatives to <i>Voacanga africana</i> for the Production of Antiaddictive Ibogan Type Alkaloids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In continuation of our efforts to provide quantitative information on antiaddictive ibogan type alkaloid-producing Tabernaemontana species, we used gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) to compare the alkaloid profiles of the barks and/or leaves of one Mexican and one African species - T. arborea and T. crassa, respectively, with the primary sources of commercially available semisynthetic ibogaine, Voacanga africana root and stem bark. The qualitative and quantitative similarities between T. arborea and V. africana barks consolidate previous reports regarding the potential of the former as a promising alternative source of voacangine and ibogaine. The results also suggest that T. crassa could be used to produce conopharyngine and ibogaline, two compounds with the same basic skeletal structure and possibly similar antiaddictive properties as ibogaine.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".