LC/MS/MS analysis of the daphnane orthoester simplexin in poisonous Pimelea species of Australian rangelands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (MS)/MS was used to analyse toxins in P. trichostachia, P. simplex subsp. continua, P. simplex subsp. continua and P. elongata samples (flowers, seeds, branches, main stem, leaves and roots) collected from various locations in Queensland, Saskatchewan and New South Wales, Australia. Simplexin was the major analyte in all taxa, with varying minor levels of huratoxin. Simplexin levels in P. trichostachia and P. elongata were higher (580 and 540 mg/kg in flowering foliage, respectively) than in P. simplex (255 mg/kg). Levels of huratoxin were higher in P. simplex (relative to simplexin) than in P. trichostachia or P. elongata. P. simplex flower heads and roots contained similar simplexin levels, with very small amounts of toxins detected in branches, stems and leaves. In P. trichostachia, simplexin levels were high in flower heads but low in the the other plant parts. The simplexin levels in aerial parts were generally higher from the pre-flowering to the flowering stage, decreasing towards the post-flowering stage; similar trends were recorded for P.elongata samples collected from a site near Bollon and P. trichostachia samples collected from a site near Jericho (both sites in Queensland). The simplexin concentration in roots was much less variable. Flowers and seeds had much higher simplexin levels than the foliage. The breakdown of the toxin in litter was more rapid compared to seeds under the same weathering conditions. Unlike the results from the litter samples, no significant decrease occurred in seed samples after 18 months of exposure.
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 | 0.001 | 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".