Medicinal Properties and Bioactive Compounds from Wild Mushrooms Native to North America
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
Mushrooms, the fruiting bodies of fungi, are known for a long time in different cultures around the world to possess medicinal properties and are used to treat various human diseases. Mushrooms that are parts of traditional medicine in Asia had been extensively studied and this has led to identification of their bioactive ingredients. North America, while home to one of the world's largest and diverse ecological systems, has not subjected its natural resources especially its diverse array of mushroom species for bioprospecting purposes: Are mushrooms native to North America a good source for drug discovery? In this review, we compile all the published studies up to September 2020 on the bioprospecting of North American mushrooms. Out of the 79 species that have been investigated for medicinal properties, 48 species (60%) have bioactivities that have not been previously reported. For a mere 16 selected species, 17 new bioactive compounds (10 small molecules, six polysaccharides and one protein) have already been isolated. The results from our literature search suggest that mushrooms native to North America are indeed a good source for drug discovery.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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