Determination of Insoluble, Soluble, and Total Dietary Fiber (CODEX Definition) by Enzymatic-Gravimetric Method and Liquid Chromatography: Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method for the determination of insoluble (IDF), soluble (SDF), and total dietary fiber (TDF), as defined by the CODEX Alimentarius, was validated in foods. Based upon the principles of AOAC Official Methods 985.29, 991.43, 2001.03, and 2002.02, the method quantitates water-insoluble and water-soluble dietary fiber. This method extends the capabilities of the previously adopted AOAC Official Method 2009.01, Total Dietary Fiber in Foods, Enzymatic-Gravimetric-Liquid Chromatographic Method, applicable to plant material, foods, and food ingredients consistent with CODEX Definition 2009, including naturally occurring, isolated, modified, and synthetic polymers meeting that definition. The method was evaluated through an AOAC/AACC collaborative study. Twenty-two laboratories participated, with 19 laboratories returning valid assay data for 16 test portions (eight blind duplicates) consisting of samples with a range of traditional dietary fiber, resistant starch, and nondigestible oligosaccharides. The dietary fiber content of the eight test pairs ranged from 10.45 to 29.90%. Digestion of samples under the conditions of AOAC 2002.02 followed by the isolation, fractionation, and gravimetric procedures of AOAC 985.29 (and its extensions 991.42 and 993.19) and 991.43 results in quantitation of IDF and soluble dietary fiber that precipitates (SDFP). The filtrate from the quantitation of water-alcohol-insoluble dietary fiber is concentrated, deionized, concentrated again, and analyzed by LC to determine the SDF that remains soluble (SDFS), i.e., all dietary fiber polymers of degree of polymerization = 3 and higher, consisting primarily, but not exclusively, of oligosaccharides. SDF is calculated as the sum of SDFP and SDFS. TDF is calculated as the sum of IDF and SDF. The within-laboratory variability, repeatability SD (Sr), for IDF ranged from 0.13 to 0.71, and the between-laboratory variability, reproducibility SD (SR), for IDF ranged from 0.42 to 2.24. The within-laboratory variability Sr for SDF ranged from 0.28 to 1.03, and the between-laboratory variability SR for SDF ranged from 0.85 to 1.66. The within-laboratory variability Sr for TDF ranged from 0.47 to 1.41, and the between-laboratory variability SR for TDF ranged from 0.95 to 3.14. This is comparable to other official and approved dietary fiber methods, and the method is recommended for adoption as Official First Action.
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 | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".