Preparation and Characterization of <i>Camelina sativa</i> Protein Isolates and Mucilage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Processes for the production of protein isolates from camerlina Camelina sativa were developed by modifying the procedure used for other seeds from the Brassicaceae family, such as rapeseed and mustard. The procedure consisted of defatting the seed followed by alkaline extraction at pH 11, ultra‐ and diafiltration using a 5‐kDa membrane, isolelectric precipitation of the proteins at pH 5 and recovery of the acid soluble protein isolates (SPI) after further filtration and drying. Protein yields as precipitated protein isolate and SPI were 10.7 and 11.4%, containing 67 and 42%, respectively. Due to the high concentration of mucilage in camelina, a water‐to‐seed ratio of 30 had to be used for protein extraction from the hexane‐defatted seed and most of the mucilage had to be removed prior to the defatting process. A rapid mucilage extraction process using water at 55 °C was developed. Camelina mucilage absorbs water and oil. Viscosity measurements of dried and redissolved mucilage showed the highest values at natural pH, and the viscosity increased rapidly above 1% solids concentration. It may be a useful product in the food and pharmaceutical industries.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".