Amino acid profile, protein digestibility, thermal and functional properties of Conophor nut (<i>Tetracarpidium conophorum</i>) defatted flour, protein concentrate and isolates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Functional properties, amino acid compositions, in vitro protein digestibility, electrophoretic and thermal characteristics of conophor defatted flour (CDF), conophor protein concentrate (CPC), isoelectric protein isolate (CII) and neutral protein isolate (CNI) were evaluated. The isolates (CII and CNI) showed significantly lower (P < 0.05) water and oil absorption capacities, emulsifying and gelling capacities, but higher emulsion stability and foaming capacity. In vitro protein digestibility, enthalpy and denaturation temperature varied between 52.28% and 73.4%, 1.62–4.04 J g−1 protein and 79.7–89.3 °C, respectively. The native proteins were comprised of subunits with molecular weights ranging between 15.3 and 129.3 kDa. The major amino acids in all the samples were aspartic acid, glutamic acid and arginine, whereas the percentages of essential amino acids in CDF, CPC, CII and CNI were 39.35%, 40.46%, 44.54% and 46.04%, respectively. Conophor protein products could be used as functional ingredients in food formulations and for enriching low quality protein diets.
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".