Lipids, Tocopherols, and Carotenoids in Leaves of Amaranth and Quinoa Cultivars and a New Approach to Overall Evaluation of Nutritional Quality Traits
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composition of lipophilic phytochemicals including fatty acids, tocopherols, and carotenoids in leaves of 6 quinoa and 14 amaranth cultivars was analyzed. The oil yields in quinoa and amaranth leaves were only 2.72-4.18%, which contained mainly essential fatty acids and had a highly favorable ω-3/ω-6 ratio (2.28-3.89). Pro-vitamin A carotenoids, mainly α- and β-carotenes, and xanthophylls, predominantly lutein and violaxanthin, were found in all samples. The primary tocopherol isomers present in both quinoa and amaranth leaves were α- and β-tocopherols. Added to the discussion on the lipophilic nutrients was the normalization of ω-3/ω-6 ratio, α-tocopherol equivalents, and carotenoids, in an attempt to establish a novel system for evaluation of the overall quality attributes of lipophilic nutrients (NQ value). The NQ value, but not the individual components, was highly correlated with all the antioxidant activities, supporting the ranking order of the potential nutritional quality of quinoa and amaranth leaves based on this new method.
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.
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 it