MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2349466177

Research on Analysis Method of Fatty Acid Composition in Small Tomato Seeds

2013· article· en· W2349466177 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wang Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid metabolism and biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryPotassium hydroxideComposition (language)Fatty acidMethanolExtraction (chemistry)Fatty acid methyl esterChromatographyGas chromatographyFood scienceOrganic chemistryBiodiesel
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The composition of fatty acids in rude fat which was extracted from small tomato seeds and modified to methyl esters were detected by Gas chromatography(GC),using supelco 37 fatty acid methyl ester Mixture(37 FAME) as control.The result showed that a fast analysis method was established for detecting relative percentage content of fatty acids in a small tomato seeds.Rude fat was extracted from a 4mg sample using isooctane for 5 minutes,and it was esterified using potassium hydroxide-methanol solution(2 mol / L) for 5minutes,then the solution was injected into the GC system.Using this method,the work which usually need several hours can be completed in 20 mins now,thus lots of time can be saved.The value of fatty acid composition in tomato seeds are not affected by Sample Weight,crude fat extraction time and fatty acid esterification time.Comparing this method with traditional method(GB / T 5009.6-2003,GB / T 17376-2008 5 ester exchange method) for detecting fatty acids composition,it was confirmed that the results got from this method was accurate and feasible.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicLipid metabolism and biosynthesisFrench-language works237,207