Antioxidant Activity of Hazelnut Skin Phenolics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenolic compounds were extracted from hazelnut skin using 80% (v/v) aqueous acetone or methanol. The crude extracts were applied onto a Sephadex LH-20 column for two fractionations (Fr. I and Fr. II). Fr. I consisting of low-molecular-weight phenolics was eluted by ethanol, whereas Fr. II consisting of tannins was obtained using acetone/water (1:1, v/v) as the mobile phase. UV spectra of phenolic compounds present in the crude extracts and their fractions exhibited a maximum absorbance at 282 nm. The crude extracts and their fractions were examined for phenolic and condensed tannin contents as well as total antioxidant activity (TAA), antiradical activity against the 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical, and reducing power. Results of these assays showed higher values when Fr. II containing tannins was tested, followed by crude extract, and Fr. I. Both 80% acetone and methanol were capable of extracting phenolics, but 80% acetone was a more effective solvent for the extraction of condensed tannins (p < 0.05). These results suggest that hazelnut skin can be considered as a value-added byproduct for use as dietary antioxidants.
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) | 0.002 | 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".