MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215467444 · doi:10.3390/mi12111425

Anti-Methanogenic Effect of Phytochemicals on Methyl-Coenzyme M Reductase—Potential: In Silico and Molecular Docking Studies for Environmental Protection

2021· article· en· W3215467444 on OpenAlexaff
Yuvaraj Dinakarkumar, Jothi Ramalingam Rajabathar, Selvaraj Arokiyaraj, Iyyappan Jeyaraj, A. Ramesh, S. Sandeep, C.S. Karthik, Jimmy Nelson Appaturi, Lee D. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsChemistryOriganumCymbopogon citratusMethanogenesisOfficinalisBiochemistryStereochemistryBotanyEssential oilMethaneBiologyOrganic chemistryFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methane is a greenhouse gas which poses a great threat to life on earth as its emissions directly contribute to global warming and methane has a 28-fold higher warming potential over that of carbon dioxide. Ruminants have been identified as a major source of methane emission as a result of methanogenesis by their respective gut microbiomes. Various plants produce highly bioactive compounds which can be investigated to find a potential inhibitor of methyl-coenzyme M reductase (the target protein for methanogenesis). To speed up the process and to limit the use of laboratory resources, the present study uses an in-silico molecular docking approach to explore the anti-methanogenic properties of phytochemicals from Cymbopogon citratus, Origanum vulgare, Lavandula officinalis, Cinnamomum zeylanicum, Piper betle, Cuminum cyminum, Ocimum gratissimum, Salvia sclarea, Allium sativum, Rosmarinus officinalis and Thymus vulgaris. A total of 168 compounds from 11 plants were virtually screened. Finally, 25 scrutinized compounds were evaluated against methyl-coenzyme M reductase (MCR) protein using the AutoDock 4.0 program. In conclusion, the study identified 21 out of 25 compounds against inhibition of the MCR protein. Particularly, five compounds: rosmarinic acid (−10.71 kcal/mol), biotin (−9.38 kcal/mol), α-cadinol (−8.16 kcal/mol), (3R,3aS,6R,6aR)-3-(2H-1,3-benzodioxol-4-yl)-6-(2H-1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-hexahydrofuro[3,4-c]furan-1-one (−12.21 kcal/mol), and 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5decyn4,7diol (−9.02 kcal/mol) showed higher binding energy towards the MCR protein. In turn, these compounds have potential utility as rumen methanogenic inhibitors in the proposed methane inhibitor program. Ultimately, molecular dynamics simulations of rosmarinic acid and (3R,3aS,6R,6aR)-3-(2H-1,3-benzodioxol-4-yl)-6-(2H-1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-hexahydrofuro[3,4-c]furan-1-one yielded the best possible interaction and stability with the active site of 5A8K protein for 20 ns.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionFrench-language works237,207