MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077287337 · doi:10.1071/an13556

Processing and storage of ratite oils affects primary oxidation status and radical scavenging ability

2014· article· en· W2077287337 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Mashtoub, Darin C. Bennett, Cuong Duy Tran, Gordon S. Howarth

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Production Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntioxidantRendering (computer graphics)ChemistryFood scienceMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatments for diseases such as coronary artery disease and gastrointestinal disorders seek to minimise oxidative damage by free radicals through the use of antioxidants. Oils derived from ratites (flightless birds) have therapeutic potential, with varying fatty acid composition between species. The current study investigated the influence of farm location, rendering method, duration and storage mode on radical scavenging activity (RSA) and primary oxidation status of ratite oils. Emu Oil (n = 8; EO1, EO2a/b, EO3–7; varying processing and storage factors), Ostrich Oil (OsO), Rhea Oil (RO) and olive oil (OlO) were tested for free RSA against 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl hydracyl (expressed as 1/IC50 g/mL) and primary oxidation (peroxide mEqO2/kg). RSA (g/mL) of EO1 (558 ± 22) was greater than EO2a (8 ± 0.6), EO5 (413 ± 26), EO6 (16 ± 0.3) and EO7 (2 ± 0.2), OsO (313 ± 12), RO (32 ± 12) and OlO (196 ± 4), and less than EO3 (717 ± 32; P < 0.001). Antioxidant properties of OsO were more pronounced than RO (P < 0.001). Primary oxidation (mEqO2/kg) of EO1 (97 ± 0.6) was greater than EO2a (57 ± 0.6), EO2b (28 ± 0.2), EO5 (11 ± 0.6), OsO (50 ± 0.9) and OlO (61 ± 0.9). The wide variability in RSA of oils highlights the need for standardisation of farm location, diet composition, rendering procedures, time of render and duration of storage. Regulatory control of these parameters is recommended in order to minimise differences in therapeutic efficacy of ratite oils.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Production ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207