MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332748945 · doi:10.1139/v11-057

A <sup>1</sup>H NMR study of the fatty acid distribution in developing flax bolls before and after a cooking treatment

2011· article· en· W2332748945 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Christopher W. Kirby, Jason McCallum, Bourlaye Fofana

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytoestrogen effects and research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSaponificationChemistryFatty acidNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyGas chromatographyLinolenic acidOrganic chemistryCultivarFood scienceChromatographyBotanyLinoleic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flax is an important Canadian crop that contains a large percentage of fatty acids (FAs) by seed weight. Gas chromatography (GC) methods have traditionally been used to study FA distributions in oil seed crops. These methods, however, require sample preparation involving saponification and methyl ester formation. Recently, 1H NMR has been shown to be an excellent way to directly measure FA distributions in edible oils using a nondestructive and experimentally faster methodology. As such, we have examined the FA profiles in developing bolls of flax cultivar AC McDuff using 1H NMR and assessed the effect of cooking on FA stability and distribution. The data confirmed the high percentage of linolenic acid in mature AC McDuff flax seed compared to early stages of development and showed that FAs at early stages of boll development are more prone to thermal degradation. Triacylglycerol was found to be important to FA stability to heat. It was also observed that the FAs did not convert from cis to trans under the cooking process used herein. The usefulness of 1H NMR spectroscopy in oils chemistry is highlighted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicPhytoestrogen effects and researchFrench-language works237,207