Evaluation of Antioxidant Activity and Electronic Taste and Aroma Properties of Antho-Beers from Purple Wheat Grain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Moderate consumption of beer is known to be beneficial for health. Thus, antioxidant, likely taste, and aroma properties of antho-beers made from purple wheat grain (antho-grain) were evaluated. The 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryhydrazyl free radical (DPPH*) scavenging activity, total phenolic content (TPC), oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), and phenolic acid compositions of antho-bran were also investigated. DPPH* scavenging activity at 60 min was 50.6-59.9% for control and antho-beer extracts, 15.0-54.1% for antho-bran extracts and hydrolysates. The TPC ranged from 410 to 609 mg/L, from 84 to 95 mg/L, and from 2473 to 7634 mg/kg for control (from barley malt) and antho-beer original samples, control and antho-beer extracts, and antho-bran extracts and hydrolysates, respectively. The corresponding ORAC values were 3050-4181 mg/L, 2961-3184 mg/L, and 74-213 g/kg, respectively. The major known phenolic acids comprised four types in control beer, five types in antho-beers, and seven types in antho-bran hydrolysates. Total anthocyanin content of antho-bran was up to 1160 mg/kg. Differences in likely taste and aroma were found between control and antho-beers by using electronic tongue and nose methods. Brewing materials had an effect on the antioxidant, likely taste, and aroma properties of beers; however, antho-grain may have potential as a novel brewing material.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".