A Box-behnken Design for Characterizing Chinese Truffles (Tuber indicum) Aroma by HS-SPME-GC-MS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present investigation is to fully characterize the aroma of Chinese truffles (Tuber indicum) by headspace solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME). To develop an objective method to extract aroma compounds, four different fibers were studied and a Box-Behnken design (BBD) was applied. From the statistical analysis of the experimental result, it was able to determine that the most important factor was the extraction temperature and the optimum extraction conditions were as follows: extraction time 20.6 min, extraction temperature 52.4 oC and equilibrium time 6.8 min, By using gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis under the optimal conditions, it identified 24 compounds, three of which were reported for the first time in the Chinese truffle: 2-methylpropanal, 2,3-butanedione, 2-nonanone. And we found that the highest content compound was dimethyl sulfide, followed by 3-methylbutanal, 2-methylbutanal, 2-butanol and 1-pentanol, 1-octen-3-ol, all of those compounds were previously described as characteristic aroma of truffle.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".