MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044821866 · doi:10.1094/cchem-86-6-0623

Effect of the Molecular Weight Distribution of Glutenin Protein from an Extra‐Strong Wheat Flour on Rheological and Breadmaking Properties Through Reconstitution Studies

2009· article· en· W2044821866 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wei Wang, Khalil Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueCereal Chemistry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGluteninChemistryGlutenFractionationFraction (chemistry)ChromatographyGliadinStorage proteinFood sciencePlant proteinProtein subunitBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Ten glutenin fractions were separated by sequential extraction of wheat gluten protein with dilute hydrochloric acid from defatted glutenin‐rich wheat gluten of the Canadian hard red spring wheat (HRSW) cultivar Glenlea. The molecular weight distribution (MWD) of 10 different soluble glutenin fractions was examined by multistacking SDS‐PAGE under nonreduced conditions. Also, the subunit composition of the different glutenin fractions was determined by SDS‐PAGE under reduced conditions. The MWD of the fractions (especially HMW glutenins) varied from fraction to fraction. From early to later fractions, the MWD shifted from low to high. The early extracted fractions contained more LMW glutenin subunits (LMW‐GS) and less HMW glutenin subunits (HMW‐GS). The later extracted fractions and the residue fraction contained much more HMW‐GS (2*, 5, and 7 subunits) than the early extracted fractions. The trend in the amounts of 2*, 5, and 7 subunits in each fraction from low to high matched the extraction solvent sequence containing from lower to higher levels of HCl. The influence of glutenin protein fractions from the extra‐strong mixing cultivar, Glenlea, on the breadmaking quality of the weak HRSW, McVey, was assessed by enriching (by 1%) the McVey base flour with isolated glutenin protein fractions from Glenlea. The mixograph peak development times and loaf volumes of enriched flour were measured in an optimized baking test. The results indicated that the higher content in Glenlea glutenin of HMW‐GS with higher molecular weight, such as 2*, 5, and 7, seem to be the critical factor responsible for the strong mixing properties of Glenlea. Our results confirmed that subunit 7 occurred in the highest quantity of all the HMW‐GS. Therefore, it seems that the greater the content of larger molecular weight glutenin subunits, the larger the glutenin polymers and the stronger the flour.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCereal ChemistrySame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207