Proximate and Cardiac Glycoside Composition of Thevetia (Thevetia neriifolia. JUSS) Seed as Affected by Soaking in Water, Brine and Ethanol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effects of soaking using water, ethanol and brine on proximate and cardiac glycoside composition of Thevetia neriifolia seed (TS) were undertaken. Each 100g portion of TS was soaked in either water or ethanol for 24 hours or in 2.5, 5.0 and 7.5% brine solution for 2, 3 or 4 hours. The samples were then either sun-dried for 3 days or toasted after soaking and thereafter analyzed for chemical and residual glycoside composition. There were significant (P<0.05) variations in the composition of ash which ranged from 13.0% in the raw meal (TR) to 11.04% in T4 (TS soaked in fine-grade ethanol and sun-dried). Obtained values for nitrogen free extracts was between 12.56% in T1 (TS soaked in water and toasted) and 28.31% in T4. These values varied significantly (P<0.05) among the groups except in T2 (TS soaked in water and sun-dried) (19.47%) and T3 (TS soaked in fine-grade ethanol and toasted) (20.09%) where the values were similar (P>0.05). Toasting significantly (P<0.05) reduced the crude protein (CP) in water and ethanol treated samples from19.35% in raw sample to 18.14 and 18.43%, respectively. The CP increased significantly in sun-dried water (22.1%) and brine treated (23.1%) samples. Soaking in 7.5% brine for 3 hours significantly (P<0.05) reduced glycoside content from 4.7% to 0.07% (98.51% reduction of glycoside).
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".