Critical Evaluation of Changes in the Ratio of Insoluble Bound to Soluble Phenolics on Antioxidant Activity of Lentils during Germination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new indicator, the ratio of insoluble bound phenolics (IBPs) to soluble phenolics (SPs), is suggested as an effective means to monitor changes in the antioxidant activity of lentils during germination. This indicator may be used to monitor other process-induced changes in antioxidant potential of food phenolics in other foods. The antioxidant activity of SPs, IBPs, and total value, the sum of both free and esterified phenolics, of germinated CDC Richlea lentil variety was evaluated for 4 days. Total phenolic content (TPC), total flavonoid content (TFC), 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical, and 2,2'-azinobis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS) radical cation scavenging ability were employed to record antioxidant activities. An incremental increase in IBPs was found in TPC, TFC, DPPH, and ABTS radical cation scavenging ability, whereas SPs showed a declining trend in TFC, DPPH, and ABTS, except TPC during 4 days of germination. The ratio of IBPs to SPs increased using most methods, and this may be possibly due to the changes of phenolic compound formation from soluble into insoluble bound form during germination process. The ratio can be used as a novel method for monitoring process-induced changes in the antioxidant activity of foods.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".