Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oxidative stability of selected tree nut oils was examined. The oils of almond, Brazil nut, hazelnut, pecan, pine nut, pistachio, and walnut were extracted using two solvent extraction systems, namely, hexane and chloroform/methanol. The chloroform/methanol system afforded a higher oil yield for each tree nut type examined (pine nut had the highest oil content, whereas almond had the lowest). The fatty acid compositions of tree nut oils were analyzed using gas chromatography, showing that oleic acid was the predominant fatty acid in all samples except pine nut and walnut oils, which contained high amounts of linoleic acid. The tocopherol compositions were analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography, showing that alpha- and gamma-tocopherols were the predominant tocopherol homologues present; however delta- and beta-tocopherols were also detected in some samples. The oxidative stability of nonstripped and stripped tree nut oils was examined under two conditions, namely, accelerated autoxidation and photooxidation. Progression of oxidation was monitored using tests for conjugated dienes, peroxide value, p-anisidine value, and headspace volatiles. Primary products of oxidation persisted in the earlier stages of oxidation, whereas secondary oxidation product levels increased dramatically during the later stages of oxidation. Hexanal was the major headspace aldehyde formed in all oxidized samples except walnut oil, which contained primarily propanal. Results showed that chloroform/methanol-extracted oils were more stable than hexane-extracted oils in both the accelerated autoxidation and photooxidation studies. Oils of pecan and pistachio were the most stable, whereas oils of pine nut and walnut were the least stable.
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".