MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974995178 · doi:10.1021/jf102400t

Stability of Lutein in Wholegrain Bakery Products Naturally High in Lutein or Fortified with Free Lutein

2010· article· en· W1974995178 on OpenAlexafffund
El‐Sayed M. Abdel‐Aal, J. Christopher Young, Humayoun Akhtar, Iwona Rabalski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntioxidant Activity and Oxidative Stress
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsLuteinZeaxanthinFood scienceCarotenoidChemistryXanthophyll

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lutein is a yellow pigment found in common foods that promotes the health of eyes and skin and is associated with reduced risk of age-related macular degeneration and cataracts. In the present study, selected high-lutein wheat and corn were milled into wholegrain flours by two mills to improve flour uniformity. The high-lutein and lutein-fortified wholegrain flours were processed into breads, cookies, and muffins to study lutein stability during baking and subsequent storage. Lutein and its isomers were separated, identified, and quantified by LC-UV/vis and LC-MS following extraction with water-saturated 1-butanol. Baking resulted in a significant reduction in all-trans-lutein and the formation of cis-lutein and cis-zeaxanthin isomers. Subsequent storage at ambient temperature had a slight impact on the content of all-trans-lutein. Effects of processing were more pronounced in lutein-fortified products, and the degradation rate of lutein was influenced by concentration and baking recipe. Fortified cookies and muffins showed greater lutein reduction compared with bread. Despite the significant reduction in lutein, the fortified bakery products still possessed reasonable amounts per serving that would enhance daily intake and consumption of wholegrain foods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations62
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicAntioxidant Activity and Oxidative StressFrench-language works237,207