MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097455501 · doi:10.5539/jas.v7n12p177

Carotenoid Retention in Immature Corn Ear Grains Subjected to Different Thermal Treatments

2015· article· en· W2097455501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Natália Alves Barbosa, M. C. D. Paes, P. E. O. Guimarães, Joelma Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntioxidant Activity and Oxidative Stress
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCookerCarotenoidFood scienceCompletely randomized designChemistryFactorial experimentCultivarVitaminHigh-performance liquid chromatographyCooking methodsHorticultureBiologyMathematicsBiochemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Processed food products may undergo changes in chemical composition during processing, leading to potential losses in nutritional value. The objective of this study was to determine carotenoid retention in immature grains of normal corn (BRS1030) and corn biofortified (BRS4104) with vitamin A precursors subjected to different thermal treatments: cooking in a microwave, cooking in a pressure cooker, cooking in a pot with a lid and cooking in a pot without a lid. The experiment had a completely randomized design in a factorial scheme (cultivar and type of cooking). The carotenoids were extracted in a sequential organic solvent scheme and quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The results were submitted to analysis of variance (ANOVA), and when significant, the means were compared using the least significant difference (LSD) test (p = 0.05). Despite cultivars, the concentrations of carotenoid vitamin A precursors and total carotenoids in the immature corn grains were reduced after cooking the ears in a microwave or in a pressure cooker. The best treatments for preserving carotenoids according to the conditions studied are cooking in a pot with a lid and in a pot without a lid.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAntioxidant Activity and Oxidative StressFrench-language works237,207