MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2414189328 · doi:10.1364/boe.6.003694

Second harmonic generation microscopy investigation of the crystalline ultrastructure of three barley starch lines affected by hydration

2015· article· en· W2414189328 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard Cisek, Danielle Tokarz, Martin Steup, Ian J. Tetlow, Michael J. Emes, Kim H. Hebelstrup, Andreas Blennow, Virginijus Barzda

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsUltrastructureMicroscopyStarchOptical microscopeOpticsSecond-harmonic generationMaterials scienceBiophysicsChemistryScanning electron microscopeBiologyAnatomyBiochemistryComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Second harmonic generation (SHG) microscopy is employed to study changes in crystalline organization due to altered gene expression and hydration in barley starch granules. SHG intensity and susceptibility ratio values (R'SHG ) are obtained using reduced Stokes-Mueller polarimetric microscopy. The maximum R'SHG values occur at moderate moisture indicating the narrowest orientation distribution of nonlinear dipoles from the cylindrical axis of glucan helices. The maximum SHG intensity occurs at the highest moisture and amylopectin content. These results support the hypothesis that SHG is caused by ordered hydrogen and hydroxyl bond networks which increase with hydration of starch granules.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations32
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Optics ExpressSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207