MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142195853 · doi:10.1002/ejlt.200900185

Determining nutritional labeling data for fats and oils by <sup>1</sup>H NMR

2010· article· en· W2142195853 on OpenAlexaff
Jacqueline Sedman, Lei Gao, Diego L. García‐González, Sadia Ehsan, F.R. van de Voort

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Lipid Science and Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryDegree of unsaturationPartial least squares regressionAllylic rearrangementProton NMRNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyNMR spectra databaseAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Spectral lineChromatographyOrganic chemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nutrition labeling compositional data (NLCD) required for fat‐containing food products consists of the percentages of saturated, cis ‐monounsaturated, and cis ‐polyunsaturated fat as well as trans content. The capability of 1 H NMR spectroscopy to determine the NLCD components in oils that do not contain significant levels of trans isomers has already been established in the literature, but not its capability to differentiate between cis ‐ and trans ‐unsaturation. In the present study, the determination of all four NLCD components in fats and oils has been demonstrated for the first time. A preliminary analysis of the intensity‐normalized 1 H NMR spectra of defined mixtures of pure triacylglycerols (TAG) by partial least squares (PLS) regression revealed that the (mono)allylic proton resonances of cis and trans bonds were sufficiently well separated to allow for accurate quantitation of trans content by simple peak integration. This chemometric approach also served to facilitate the identification of optimal integration limits for these cis ‐ and trans ‐allylic resonances. Fixed integration limits were also set for the other resonances employed in the determination of the four NLCD components, and a standardized spectral preprocessing procedure was established. The 1 H NMR NLCD data obtained for the TAG mixtures by this methodology was a good match to the actual values, calculated from the known molar composition of these gravimetrically prepared mixtures. A procedure for the conversion of the NMR mol% NLCD to units of wt%, previously developed for 13 C NMR, was adapted for 1 H NMR and shown to be effective in compensating for the overestimation of wt% saturates and underestimation of wt% unsaturates by 1 H NMR if this conversion is not made. The 1 H NMR methodology for NLCD determination was validated by analyzing AOCS Laboratory Proficiency Program GC samples as well as samples taken from a hydrogenator over time and analyzed for trans content by GC and IR spectroscopy. Comparison of the 1 H NMR mol% and wt% NLCD obtained for these validation samples with the data obtained from the reference methods indicated that 1 H NMR can deliver high‐quality, accurate NLCD, much like 13 C NMR, but in a much shorter time frame. Thus, 1 H NMR provides a more rapid and cost‐effective means of obtaining NLCD than 13 C NMR and can replace GC as a primary reference method for the calibration of simpler and automatable instrumental methods such as Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Lipid Science and TechnologySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207