MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111375890 · doi:10.2174/1874331500802010007

Bioactive Compounds and their Antioxidant Capacity in Selected Primitive and Modern Wheat Species

2008· article· en· W2111375890 on OpenAlexafffund
El‐Sayed M. Abdel‐Aal, Iwona Rabalski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Agriculture Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant Activities
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsABTSDPPHFood sciencePhenolsAntioxidantCarotenoidChemistryFerulic acidTocopherolLuteinBranAntioxidant capacityTocotrienolBotanyBiologyVitamin EBiochemistryOrganic chemistryRaw material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole grain foods have been recommended for healthy diets as being recognized sources of dietary fiber and antioxidants. A diverse array of wheat was evaluated in terms of bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacity. The bioactive compounds examined include phenolic acids, carotenoids and tocols which were determined by HPLC. Antioxidant was based on the determination of scavenging capacity of DPPH. and ABTS. + radicals and total phenols assay. Significant differences were observed in total phenols and ferulic acid between wheat species. Wheat species contained four major tocols including 2 tocopherols and 2 tocotrienols with β-tocotrienol being the most abundant tocol. Lutein, the primary carotenoid in wheat, significantly differed among wheat species ranging from 1.0 to 8.1 mg kg -1 . Scavenging capacity of DPPH. and ABTS. + radicals significantly varied being 1.97-3.20 and 17.1-24.7 μmole g -1 , respectively. The results show the presence of considerable variability among wheat species in antioxidant composition and capacity with certain wheats hold promise for the development of functional foods for health promotion.

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)0.000
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 score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations106
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Agriculture JournalSame topicPhytochemicals and Antioxidant ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207