MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968445402 · doi:10.1021/jf990922p

Quantitation of the Lignan Secoisolariciresinol Diglucoside in Baked Goods Containing Flax Seed or Flax Meal

2000· article· en· W1968445402 on OpenAlexaff
Alister D. Muir, Neil D. Westcott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant-derived Lignans Synthesis and Bioactivity
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLignanFood scienceChemistryMealOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Samples of commercially prepared white, whole wheat, flax, and multigrain breads were analyzed by a rapid RP-HPLC method for the presence of the lignan secoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG). SDG was detected only in products containing flax, with concentrations ranging from 0.06 to 1.98 microM/g of DW (19-602 microM/loaf). Full-fat flax meal, powdered aqueous alcohol extracts of flax seed, and SDG were added to a white bread mix and baked into loaves in a domestic bread maker. Quantitative recovery of SDG from the test breads was observed when SDG was added; however, when flax meal or aqueous alcohol extracts were added, only 73-75% of the theoretical yield of SDG was recovered. SDG was also detected in commercially prepared flax cookies, bagels, and muffins with concentrations ranging from 0.26 to 2.93 microM/g of DW. The extent of grinding of the flax seed was also shown to have a significant effect on the recovery of SDG from both flax meal breads and baked goods, with extraction of SDG from finely ground samples greater than that from course material.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations114
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicPlant-derived Lignans Synthesis and BioactivityFrench-language works237,207