Comparisons of Modern U. S. and Canadian Malting Barley Cultivars with Those from Pre-Prohibition: III. Wort Sugar Production during Mashing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wort sugars produced during Congress mashing of pre-Prohibition and modern barley genotypes were compared. Four of five modern cultivars were higher (P < 0.0001) in wort glucose production than six pre-Prohibition cultivars. Mean wort glucose levels of the five modern cultivars were higher (P values from 0.0002 to 0.0021) than that of the pre-Prohibition barleys. In contrast, maltose production was variable and there were no significant differences in mean levels in modern versus pre-Prohibition barley worts, although Manchuria (pre-Prohibition) and Tradition (modern) produced higher (P < 0.0001) levels than other genotypes. Wort maltotriose levels were also quite variable among genotypes, although were higher (P < 0.0001) in Harrington (modern) worts than all others at the end of mashing. By the end of mashing, pre-Prohibition and modern genotypes did not statistically differ in their mean levels of maltotriose (P = 0.514). Glucose equivalents from fermentable sugars (i.e., total glucose from glucose plus hydrolysis of maltose and maltotriose) followed almost an identical pattern as that for maltose. Levels of maltotetraose through maltoheptaose were variable in both pre-Prohibition and modern genotypes throughout mashing. However, these maltodextrins usually decreased rapidly in modern cultivars while they increased or decreased more slowly in pre-Prohibition genotypes. In general, maltotetraose through maltoheptaose were higher (P < 0.0001) in Hanna and Hannchen (pre-Prohibition) worts than in other worts. Sucrose levels were relatively constant during mashing of most pre-Prohibition and modern genotypes. Fructose levels increased throughout mashing for all genotypes. Mean wort fructose levels of modern barley genotypes were significantly higher than those for pre-Prohibition genotypes during most of mashing.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".