MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199598160 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2021.721986

Cannabis Glandular Trichomes: A Cellular Metabolite Factory

2021· review· en· W3199598160 on OpenAlexafffund
Cailun A. S. Tanney, Rachel Backer, Anja Geitmann, Donald L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrichomeCannabisSecondary metaboliteCannabis sativaMetaboliteBiologyRevenueLiberian dollarBiotechnologyBusinessBotanyMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cannabis has been legalized for recreational use in several countries and medical use is authorized in an expanding list of countries; markets are growing internationally, causing an increase in demand for high quality products with well-defined properties. The key compounds of Cannabis plants are cannabinoids, which are produced by stalked glandular trichomes located on female flowers. These trichomes produce resin that contains cannabinoids, such as tetrahydrocannabinolic acid and cannabidiolic acid, and an array of other secondary metabolites of varying degrees of commercial interest. While growers tend to focus on improving whole flower yields, our understanding of the “goldmines” of the plant – the trichomes – is limited despite their being the true source of revenue for a multi-billion-dollar industry. This review aims to provide an overview of our current understanding of cannabis glandular trichomes and their metabolite products in order to identify current gaps in knowledge and to outline future research directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations124
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Parasitism and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207