Modulation of <i>in Vitro</i> SARS-CoV-2 Infection by <i>Stephania tetrandra</i> and Its Alkaloid Constituents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Botanical natural products have been widely consumed for their purported usefulness against COVID-19. Here, six botanical species from multiple sources and 173 isolated natural product compounds were screened for blockade of wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 infection in human 293T epithelial cells overexpressing ACE-2 and TMPRSS2 protease (293TAT). Antiviral activity was demonstrated by an extract from Stephania tetrandra . Extract fractionation, liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC-MS), antiviral assays, and computational analyses revealed that the alkaloid fraction and purified alkaloids tetrandrine, fangchinoline, and cepharanthine inhibited WT SARS-CoV-2 infection. The alkaloids and alkaloid fraction also inhibited the delta variant of concern but not WT SARS-CoV-2 in VeroAT cells. Membrane permeability assays demonstrate that the alkaloids are biologically available, although fangchinoline showed lower permeability than tetrandrine. At high concentrations, the extract, alkaloid fractions, and pure alkaloids induced phospholipidosis in 293TAT cells and less so in VeroAT cells. Gene expression profiling during virus infection suggested that alkaloid fraction and tetrandrine displayed similar effects on cellular gene expression and pathways, while fangchinoline showed distinct effects on cells. Our study demonstrates a multifaceted approach to systematically investigate the diverse activities conferred by complex botanical mixtures, their cell-context specificity, and their pleiotropic effects on biological systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".