Efeito do perolamento na atividade antioxidante e composição fenólica de cevada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most whole grains are processed to make acceptable products. Pearling is used to remove the firmly attached hull of barley as well as the germ in order to extend the shelf- life of the grain and the grain products. The aim of this work was to evaluate the antioxidant activity of two varieties of barley (hulled and hull-less) and correlate this activity with the phenolic composition. Barley grains were pearled and the fractions obtained were analyzed in vitro through antioxidant activity (Free Radical DPPH method and ORAC assay) and phenolic acid determination (Folin- Ciocalteau method and HPLC). The antioxidant activity in both methods presented a significant decrease after the first minute of pearling in both methods, and the results were directly correlated with phenolic acid composition and this trend is observed gradually in the samples up to the third minute of pearling. Is thus necessary to optimize barley processing with the objective of reducing the loss of these compounds during processing
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".