MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583008547 · doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.6b05062

Exploring the Relationship between Structural and Air–Water Interfacial Properties of Wheat (<i>Triticum aestivum</i> L.) Gluten Hydrolysates in a Food System Relevant pH Range

2017· article· en· W2583008547 on OpenAlexaff
Arno G.B. Wouters, Ellen Fierens, Ine Rombouts, Kristof Brijs, Iris J. Joye, Jan A. Delcour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProteins in Food Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekVlaamse Overheid
KeywordsHydrolysateGlutenChemistryHydrolysisWheat glutenFood scienceSurface chargeChemical engineeringPlant proteinChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between structural and foaming properties of two tryptic and two peptic wheat gluten hydrolysates was studied at different pH conditions. The impact of pH on foam stability (FS) of the samples heavily depended on the peptidase used and the degree of hydrolysis reached. Surface dilatational moduli were in most, but not all, instances related to FS, implying that, although the formation of a viscoelastic protein hydrolysate film is certainly important, this is not the only phenomenon that determines FS. In contrast to what might be expected, surface charge was not a major factor contributing to FS, except when close to the point-of-zero-charge. Surface hydrophobicity and intrinsic fluorescence measurements suggested that changes in protein conformation take place when the pH is varied, which can in turn influence foaming. Finally, hydrolyzed gluten proteins formed relatively large particles, suggesting that protein hydrolysate aggregation probably influences its foaming properties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.134 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicProteins in Food SystemsFrench-language works237,207