Phaeanthuslucidines A-D, dimeric aporphine alkaloid derivatives from Phaeanthus lucidus Oliv.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first phytochemical investigation of the twigs of Phaeanthus lucidus Oliv. resulted in the isolation and identification of four undescribed alkaloids, including two aporphine dimers, phaeanthuslucidines A and B, a hybrid of aristolactam-aporphine, phaeanthuslucidine C, and a C– N linked aporphine dimer, phaeanthuslucidine D, together with two known compounds. Their structures were determined by extensive analysis of spectroscopic data , and by comparison of their spectroscopic and physical data with previous reports. Phaeanthuslucidines A–C and bidebiline E were analysed and resolved by chiral HPLC to yield the ( R a ) and ( S a ) atropisomers , whose absolute configurations were respectively determined by ECD calculations. Phaeanthuslucidines A and B, bidebiline E, and lanuginosine showed α -glucosidase inhibitory activities with IC 50 values in the range of 6.7–29.2 μM. Moreover, molecular docking simulations of α -glucosidase inhibition of active compounds were studied.
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".