Anthocyanins in Wild Blueberries of Quebec: Extraction and Identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anthocyanins were extracted from a mixture of berries of Vaccinium angustifolium and Vaccinium myrtilloïdes at 7.7 degrees C, 26 degrees C, and 79 degrees C using ethanol alone or ethanol acidified with hydrochloric, citric, tartaric, lactic, or phosphoric acids at a solvent to solid ratio of 10. The effect of these parameters on extracted anthocyanins stability was investigated. The pH-differential and HPLC-DAD methods were used to determine anthocyanin contents. Extracted anthocyanins were purified on a C-18 solid-phase extraction cartridge and characterized by HPLC/electrospray ionization/mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-MS/MS). Anthocyanins were identified according to their HPLC retention times, elution order, and MS fragmentation pattern and by comparison with standards and published data. Anthocyanin extractions gave different yields depending on the type of added acid and the extraction temperature. High yields of monomeric and total anthocyanins (26.3 and 28.9 mg/g of dry matter) were obtained at 79 degrees C using phosphoric acid. Extraction using tartaric acid at 79 degrees C provided the lowest degradation index (1.05). Anthocyanins were stable and browning by polyphenol oxidase was inhibited under these conditions. Of the six common anthocyanindins, five were identified in the extracts, namely, delpinidin, cyanidin, peonidin, petunidin, and malvidin; pelargonidin was not found. In addition to well-known major anthocyanins, new anthocyanins were identified for the first time in extracts of wild blueberries from Quebec.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".