MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987700906 · doi:10.1021/jf991263j

Antioxidant Properties of Crocin from <i>Gardenia </i><i>jasminoides</i> Ellis and Study of the Reactions of Crocin with Linoleic Acid and Crocin with Oxygen

2000· article· en· W1987700906 on OpenAlexaff
Thanh Quan Pham, François Cormier, Edward R. Farnworth, Van Hang Tong, Marie‐Rose Van Calsteren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSaffron Plant Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrocinGardenia jasminoidesChemistryGardeniaCrocetinCrocus sativusAntioxidantChromatographySafranalLinoleic acidHigh-performance liquid chromatographyCarotenoidOrganic chemistryFood scienceBotanyBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crocin-a water soluble carotenoid-is found in the fruits of gardenia (Gardenia jasminoides Ellis) and in the stigmas of saffron (Crocus sativus Linne). For crocin purification, gardenia fruits are extracted with 50% acetone, followed by ether washing, ion exchange, and separation by preparative HPLC. Purified crocin with purity of >99.6% has an antioxidative activity at concentrations up to 40 ppm. At 20 ppm the antioxidative activity of crocin is comparable to that of BHA. The antioxidant property of crocin as evaluated by the thiocyanate method was better than with the thiobarbituric acid method. The adduct between the linoleic acid radical and crocin was detected by LC-MS. When crocin reacted with oxygen in the presence of FeSO(4), intermediates such as monohydroperoxides and dihydroperoxides of crocin were formed and detected by LC-MS.

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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.201
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations151
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicSaffron Plant Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207