MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907104968 · doi:10.3233/jbr-150107

Optimized encapsulation of anthocyanin-rich extract from haskap berries (Lonicera caerulea L.) in calcium-alginate microparticles

2016· article· en· W1907104968 on OpenAlexafffund
Giovana B. Celli, Amyl Ghanem, Marianne Su‐Ling Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Berry Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMicroencapsulation and Drying Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsAnthocyaninEncapsulation (networking)ChemistryCalciumCaeruleaCalcium alginateBotanyFood scienceBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND:The chemical instability of extracted anthocyanins (ACNs) limits their application and broader use as food colorants and health-promoting functional ingredients.Encapsulation technology can improve ACN stability and widen their potential applications.OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to optimize the microencapsulation of ACNs from haskap berries (Lonicera caerulea L.) in calcium-alginate particles by the extrusion/gelation method.METHODS: Response Surface Methodology (RSM) by Box-Behnken (BB) design was used for the optimization, followed by the desirability function.Three input variables were evaluated: concentrations of sodium alginate (x 1 , w/w %) and calcium chloride (x 2 , w/v %), and gelation time (x 3 , min).The responses were encapsulation efficiency (y 1 , %) and particle size (y 2 , m).RESULTS: There was a good fit for the model where encapsulation efficiency was used as a separate response (R 2 = 97.98%),however, the model for particle size did not give as good an agreement (R 2 = 63.86%).The desirability function was used to optimize the two responses simultaneously and the optimum conditions were determined as 9.0% (w/w) alginate solution, 2.0% (w/v) CaCl 2 , and 10 min in the gelation solution.CONCLUSIONS: These results illustrate the application of RSM followed by a desirability function to optimize encapsulation parameters for a combined response, where several measures are considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Berry ResearchSame topicMicroencapsulation and Drying ProcessesFrench-language works237,207