MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965547731 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v8n5p41

Effect of Decreasing Saponin Levels to Nutrition of Extracted Moringa Leaf Powder

2019· article· en· W2965547731 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuanita Indriasari, Fitriani Basrin, Miming Berlian Hi. B. Salam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMoringa oleifera research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Tadulako
KeywordsMoringaFood scienceBlanchingNutraceuticalSaponinChemistryNutrientVitaminVitamin CTasteMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moringa oleifera leaves have been used as food material because it has high nutritional value. Many research have been conducted on moringa leaves extract as functional food and the additional material of nutrient for some food products (biscuit, bread, jelly drink), which it looked that adding moringa leaves extract above 5% decrease the consumer acceptance level toward the product because of the strongest unpleasant aroma and bitter taste, which is caused by saponins content in moringa leaves extract is still high enough.This study aimed to obtain the optimal temperature and time of blanching process to reduce saponin level, and the appropriate solvents to extract nutrients from Moringa oleifera leaves so that Moringa leaves flour is obtained with no bitter taste (low saponin) and nutritious (water, protein, optimal vitamin C and vitamin A) as fortification ingredients for various food products. The results showed that the blanching treatment at 75 ° C for 5 minutes (T1W1) combined with 70% ethanol (P1) solvent was able to produce Moringa leaves flour with the lowest saponin content of 0.790%, but with nutrients that still met the requirements, namely water 6.508%, protein 28.705%, Vitamin C 90.77 mg 100 g-1 and Vitamin A 3590 µg 100 g-1.

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicMoringa oleifera research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207