Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-five samples of retail corn flakes (from 15 lots) were analysed for fumonisin B(1) (FB(1)) and fumonisin B(2) (FB(2)). They were detected in 22 and 12 samples, respectively, at respective mean concentrations 68 and 8 ng g(-1). Samples were extracted with methanol-acetonitrile-water (25:25:50) and there was an excellent correlation for FB(1) between results obtained with C(18) clean-up and those obtained with the immunoaffinity column (IAC) clean-up. After extraction of the corn flakes' residue with 1% sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) solution and hydrolysis with 2 N potassium hydroxide, hidden (protein bound) fumonisin was determined as HFB(1), which was found in residues from all the corn flakes samples, even those containing no detectable FB(1); the average concentration of HFB(1) was 101 ng g(-1), equivalent to 180 ng FB(1) g(-1). Thus, our results showed an average of 2.6 times more FB(1) present in bound form as was determined by conventional analysis. We found a correlation coefficient of -0.5034 for a logarithmic relationship between the FB(1) (C(18) clean-up) and HFB(1) concentrations The highest concentration of HFB(1) formed was 288 ng g(-1) from a sample containing only 12-15 ng FB(1) g(-1), while the lowest concentration of HFB(1) was 26 ng g(-1) from a sample with 152-155 ng FB(1) g(-1). This low degree of correlation should be taken into account by food safety authorities in estimates of human exposure to protein bound fumonisin.
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 | 0.001 | 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".