MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905585179 · doi:10.1111/ijfs.14055

Current understanding of transport and bioavailability of bioactive peptides derived from dairy proteins: a review

2018· review· en· W2905585179 on OpenAlexafffund
Qingbiao Xu, Xianghua Yan, Yangdong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBioavailabilityParacellular transportTranscellularTranscytosisProteasesChemistryPeptideAbsorption (acoustics)BiochemistryPharmacologyBiologyEnzymeMembranePermeability (electromagnetism)Materials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Dairy protein‐derived bioactive peptides ( DBP s) have potential benefits for human health. However, their transport mechanisms and bioavailability from intestinal lumen to bloodstream are not well understood. This review summarises current understanding of their transport mechanisms across the intestinal membrane (peptide transport 1, paracellular route, transcytosis and passive transcellular diffusion) and the bioavailability of DBP s in animal and human studies. Some DBP s can escape the degradation of peptidase and reach the bloodstream at concentrations of micromolar range, and keep intact for several minutes to hours. The presences of brush‐border peptidases at the site of absorption and other peptidases in the blood, along with the peptide properties, such as molecular size and weight, stability to proteases, hydrophobicity and charge, determine their bioavailability. Developing novel analytical tools for accurate measurement and study of the transport, metabolism, and bioavailability of DBP s in vivo are expected.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations42
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicProtein Hydrolysis and Bioactive PeptidesFrench-language works237,207