Mass Spectrometric Evidence for the Existence of Oligomeric Anthocyanins in Grape Skins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fractionation of a grape skin extract by multilayer countercurrent chromatography coupled with step gradient elution allowed the preparation of a fraction almost devoid of free anthocyanins. This fraction appeared to be almost exclusively polymeric, as judged by liquid chromatographic-mass spectrometric (LC-MS) analysis, color-bleaching tests with sulfur dioxide, and thiolysis. Electrospray mass spectrometric analysis indicated that the pigmented material in this fraction was chiefly composed of direct condensation products of anthocyanin extending up to trimers. With regard to their linkages, the anthocyanin units in the oligomers were possibly linked by either an A-type (by both carbon-carbon and ether bonds) or B-type (by carbon-carbon bond) linkage, like proanthocyanidins. The terminal anthocyanin unit of the oligomers is consistently in the flavylium form but the extension units are in the flavan form for the A-type oligomers and in the flavene form for the B-type oligomers. Although their linkages still need to be defined rigorously, this is the first mass spectrometric evidence confirming the existence of anthocyanin oligomers in the grape skin extract.
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 | 0.001 | 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".