MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401056538 · doi:10.3791/66967

Bioassay-Guided Identification of Natural Products for Biocontrol by Thin Layer Chromatography-Direct Bioautography

2024· article· en· W4401056538 on OpenAlexaff
Leah Gauthier, Brian D. Wagner, S.M. Boyetchko, Christopher W. Kirby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioassayBiopesticideThin-layer chromatographySclerotinia sclerotiorumBiologyPathogenBiotechnologyBacteriaChromatographyChemistryMicrobiologyPesticideBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thin layer chromatography-direct bioautography (TLC-DB) is a well-established bioassay used to separate and identify natural products (NPs) that are antagonistic against a target pathogen. It is a rapid, inexpensive, and simple option for the bioassay-guided isolation and identification of NPs that hinges on separation by TLC coupled with the direct application of a target pathogen to examine bioactivity. It is typically used for the analysis of bioactive plant extracts, detecting inhibitory activity against bacteria, fungi, and enzymes. That being said, it has great potential in bacterial NP discovery, particularly for evaluating bacterial NPs against pertinent agricultural pathogens, which is valuable for discovering and developing novel biopesticides for the agriculture industry. Furthermore, it is a tunable protocol that could be applied to other target pathogens or sources of NPs in research programs concerning the discovery and identification of bioactive compounds. Herein, we describe a model system for discovering and identifying biopesticide NPs using TLC-DB with Bacillus spp. and the agricultural pathogen Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207