MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136168048 · doi:10.4490/algae.2021.36.3.6

Antibacterial compounds in green microalgae from extreme environments: a review

2021· review· en· W3136168048 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueALGAE · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
FundersMitacsOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsBioprospectingAntibacterial activityExtreme environmentGreen algaeBiologyPhotosynthesisEnvironmentally friendlyAlgaeBiotechnologyBacteriaBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased proliferation of bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a critical issue that has increased the demand for novel antibacterial compounds. Antibacterial activities have been evaluated in extracts from photosynthetic green microalgae, with varying levels of subsequent potential for development based on the strain of algae, strain of bacterial pathogen, and solvent used to extract the metabolites. Green microalgae from extreme environmental conditions have had to adapt to conditions that exclude many other organisms. The production of antibacterial compounds aids directly or indirectly in the survival of green microalgae in these extreme environments, as well as potentially serve other roles. This review investigates antibacterial activities of green microalgae from both extreme in-situ environmental conditions and induced extreme laboratory conditions and highlights.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.231 · 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