MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195495539 · doi:10.3390/molecules26175183

Lepidium graminifolium L.: Glucosinolate Profile and Antiproliferative Potential of Volatile Isolates

2021· article· en· W3195495539 on OpenAlexaff
Azra Đulović, Franko Burčul, Vedrana Čikeš Čulić, Mirko Ruščić, Petra Brzović, Sabine Montaut, Patrick Rollin, Ivica Blažević

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics, phytochemicals, and oxidative stress
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
FundersHrvatska Zaklada za Znanost
KeywordsGlucosinolateMyrosinaseChemistryIC50HydrolysisCytotoxicityStereochemistryCell cultureChromatographyBotanyIn vitroBiochemistryBiologyBrassica

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glucosinolates (GSLs) from Lepidium graminifolium L. were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively by their desulfo-counterparts using UHPLC-DAD-MS/MS technique and by their volatile breakdown products-isothiocyanates (ITCs) using GC-MS analysis. Thirteen GSLs were identified with arylaliphatic as the major ones in the following order: 3-hydroxybenzyl GSL (glucolepigramin, 7), benzyl GSL (glucotropaeolin, 9), 3,4,5-trimethoxybenzyl GSL (11), 3-methoxybenzyl GSL (glucolimnanthin, 12), 4-hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxybenzyl GSL (3,5-dimethoxysinalbin, 8), 4-hydroxybenzyl GSL (glucosinalbin, 6), 3,4-dimethoxybenzyl GSL (10) and 2-phenylethyl GSL (gluconasturtiin, 13). GSL breakdown products obtained by hydrodistillation (HD) and CH2Cl2 extraction after hydrolysis by myrosinase for 24 h (EXT) as well as benzyl ITC were tested for their cytotoxic activity using MTT assay. Generally, EXT showed noticeable antiproliferative activity against human bladder cancer cell line UM-UC-3 and human glioblastoma cell line LN229, and can be considered as moderately active, while IC50 of benzyl ITC was 12.3 μg/mL, which can be considered as highly active.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicGenomics, phytochemicals, and oxidative stressFrench-language works237,207