A Comparison of the Antioxidant Properties and Total Phenolic Content in a Diatom, Chaetoceros sp. and a Green Microalga, Nannochloropsis sp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aquaculture industry commonly makes use of microalgae as live feed. Chaetoceros sp., a diatom, andNannochloropsis sp., a unicellular green microalga, have both been reported to contain a substantial amount ofpolyunsaturated fatty acids and carotenoids. Their potential as natural sources of antioxidants has gained recentattention. This study focuses on determining the antioxidant properties of the different solvent extracts, namelyhexane, dichloromethane, chloroform and methanol, from both microalgae. The evaluation of antioxidantcapacities was done by Folin-ciocalteu, 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radical-scavenging, metal chelating,nitro-blue tetrazolium reduction and ferric-reducing antioxidant power assay. Results showed that the non-polarsolvent extracts from the diatom were highest in antioxidant power, whereas both polar and non-polar solventextracts of green microalgae showed good antioxidant potential. In general, Chaetoceros sp. had higherantioxidant capacities than Nannochloropsis sp. This study suggests that different solvent extracts containdifferent potential antioxidant compounds able to scavenge different types of free radicals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".