Development of Hydrolysis Probe-Based qPCR Assays for Panax ginseng and Panax quinquefolius for Detection of Adulteration in Ginseng Herbal Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Authentication of Panax ginseng and Panax quinquefolius products is important to be able to mitigate instances of adulteration and substitution that exist within the international supply chain of ginseng. To address this issue, species-specific hydrolysis probe qPCR assays were developed and validated for both P. ginseng and P. quinquefolius herbal dietary supplements. Performance of the probe-based assays was evaluated using analytical validation criteria, which included evaluation of: (1) specificity, in selectively identifying the target species; (2) sensitivity, in detecting the lowest amount of the target material; and (3) repeatability and reproducibility of the method in detecting the target species in raw materials on a real-time PCR platform (reliability). The species-specific probes were developed and successfully passed the validation criteria with 100% specificity, 80–120% efficiency and 100% reliability. The methods developed in this study are fit for purpose, rapid, and easy to implement in quality assurance programs; authentication of ginseng herbal supplements is possible, even with extracts where DNA is fragmented and of low quality and quantity.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".