Antioxidant activity and inhibitory effects of lead ( <i>Leucaena leucocephala)</i> seed extracts against lipid oxidation in model systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antioxidant activity of brown lead (Leucaena leucocephala) seed extracts with and without prior chlorophyll removal was studied in comparison with mimosine. Both extracts showed similar hydroxyl radical (HO(•)) scavenging activity, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) scavenging activity, singlet oxygen inhibition and hypochlorous acid (HOCl) scavenging capacity (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, the extract without prior chlorophyll removal had higher oxygen radical absorbance capacity than that with prior chlorophyll removal (p < 0.05). Generally, lead seed extracts with and without prior chlorophyll removal possessed a lower antioxidant activity, compared with mimosine. When lead seed extract without prior chlorophyll removal (100 and 200 ppm) was used in different lipid oxidation model systems, including β-carotene-linoleic acid and lecithin liposome systems, the preventive effect toward lipid oxidation was dose-dependent. At the same level of use, mimosine exhibited a higher efficacy in prevention of lipid oxidation in both systems as indicated by the lower increases in thiobarbituric acid reactive substances. A similar result was obtained in minced mackerel. Therefore, lead seed extract containing mimosine could act as a natural antioxidant to prevent lipid oxidation in 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 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".