A new technology for extraction and purification of proanthocyanidins derived from sea buckthorn bark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A new technology involving resin purification of proanthocyanidins extracted from sea buckthorn bark has been studied. By investigating single‐factor effects, the main factors affecting proanthocyanidin extraction were identified as extraction temperature, pH and ethanol concentration. A central composite design and response surface analysis were used to determine the optimal parameters of the extraction process (temperature 21 °C, pH 5.13, ethanol concentration 65%). The optimal resin for purification, D3520, was selected from 16 different resins by means of static adsorption and dynamic adsorption/desorption tests. After using this resin to purify the crude extract, a proanthocyanidin extract was obtained whose yield and purity were above 80% and greater than 95% respectively. Procyanidin dimers and trimers predominated among oligomer procyanidins of the proanthocyanidin extract according to analyses by high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and HPLC/mass spectrometry. Copyright © 2005 Society of Chemical Industry
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".