Variations in morphology and composition of barley endosperm cell walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: The endosperm cell walls (CWs) impact upon barley grain utilization as well as influence animal and human nutrition. The objective of this study was to examine the morphological and compositional differences in the endosperm CWs derived from barley grain grown in different (uncontrolled) environments in Canada, and differing in grain hardness, protein, and total β‐glucan contents. RESULTS: The endosperm CWs were isolated from barley, cv. Metcalfe, grown in Davidson, SK (sample A), Hythe, AB (sample B), and Hamiota, MB (sample C). The inner wall surfaces of sample A exhibited deep indentations made by large and small starch granules, whereas the CWs of sample B were thicker, had smooth surface, and exhibited a greater degree of binding between the adjoining cells. The CWs of sample A contained the lowest amount of β‐glucans but the highest amount of arabinoxylans and the mannose‐containing (glucomannans) polysaccharides. The CWs of sample B contained the highest ratio of ferulic and dehydrodiferulate residues to Xyl residues among the samples, indicating the greatest potential and degree of cross‐linking of arabinoxylans in these preparations which might be related to the strength and rigidity of the grain endosperm. The amino acid composition of the proteins detected in the isolated CW indicated the presence of 37–47 g kg −1 of structural proteins. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in the morphological appearance and chemical composition of the CW preparations were observed and some attempts were made to relate these differences to the variable composition and physical properties of barley grain as affected by the environmental factors. Copyright © 2008 Crown in the Right of Canada, Canadian Grain Commission. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".