MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982865669 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v1n4p74

Effect of Kale Cultivation Conditions on Biosynthesis of Xanthophylls

2012· article· en· W1982865669 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Magdalena Ligor, Bogusław Buszewski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntioxidant Activity and Oxidative Stress
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCEEPUSUniversitatea Transilvania din Brasov
KeywordsLuteinBrassica oleraceaXanthophyllCarotenoidHorticultureChemistryGreenhouseChlorophyllBotanyFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Conditions of plant cultivation directly influence the chlorophyll and carotenoid pigments concentrations. The aim of investigations was the determination of lutein in kale (<em>Brassica oleracea</em> L. var. <em>acephala</em>) upon various cultivation conditions including: low and high temperature (overnight and daytime in the greenhouse the temperature was 12 ± 2C and in the laboratory the temperature was 22 ± 2C), lack of water (some plants were watered only one time weekly), saline stress (5% of sodium chloride added to irrigation water; watering two times weekly was applied), as well as UV radiation of plants by means of UV lamp (lambda = 254 nm; suitable to UVC solar radiation; duration 4 h per day). Three months old cuttings were taken and next mentioned cultivation conditions were applied during one month. Moreover, the outdoor cultivation of kale cuttings was performed. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of plant extracts were made by use of HPLC-UV-VIS-MS technique. Mean values for lutein accumulation as a function of dry mass (mg/g) in leaves of kale have been presented. Obtained results show maximum xantophylls (lutein) concentration occur in fully developed plant leaves of kale for red kale 2.04 ± 0.15 and green kale 1.10 ± 0.09 mg/g respectively.</p>

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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