α-Glucosidase, butyrylcholinesterase and acetylcholinesterase inhibitory activities of phenolic compounds from Carthamus tinctorius L. flowers: In silico and in vitro studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical investigation of Carthamus tinctorius L. flowers resulted in isolation of seven metabolites that were identified as; p-Hydroxybenzoic acid (1), trans hydroxy cinnamic acid (2), kaempferol-6-C-glucoside (3), astragalin (4), cartormin (5), kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside (6), and kaempferol–3-O-sophoroside (7). Virtual screening of the isolated compounds against human intestinal α-glucosidase, acetylcholinesterase, and butyrylcholinesterase was carried out. Additionally, the antioxidant activity of the bioactive compounds was assessed. Compounds 1 and 5 exhibited moderate binding affinities to acetylcholinesterase (binding energy −5.33 and −4.18 kcal/mol, respectively), compared to donepezil. Compounds 1 to 7 demonstrated weak affinity to butyrylcholinesterase. Compound 4 displayed very strong binding affinity to human intestinal α-glucosidase, better than Acarbose (reference compound), meanwhile compound 2 exhibited lower affinity. Molecular dynamic studies revealed that compound 4 formed a stable complex with the binding site throughout a 100 ns simulation period. The in-vitro results were consistent with the virtual experimental results, as compounds 1 and 5 showed mild inhibitory effects on acetylcholinesterase (IC50s 150.6–168.7 µM). Compound 4 exhibited significant α-glucosidase inhibition with an IC50 of 93.71 µM. The bioactive compounds also demonstrated notable antioxidant activity in ABTS [2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid)], ORAC (oxygen radical-absorbance capacity), and metal chelation assays, suggesting their potential in improving dementia in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mitigating hyperglycemia.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".