MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980385335 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v8n6p66

Extraction of Proteins and Pasting and Antioxidant Properties of Soybean Hulls

2019· article· en· W2980385335 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sean X. Liu, Diejun Chen, Mukti Singh, Jingyuan Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhytoestrogen effects and research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsExtraction (chemistry)Food scienceChemistrySieve (category theory)Protein purificationSoybean mealAntioxidantWater extractionPulp and paper industryChromatographyRaw materialMathematicsBiochemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soybean hulls are a by-product from soybean processing for oil and meal production which comprise approximately 8% of the whole seed. This study investigated water holding capacities and pasting properties, and first reported the phenolic contents and antioxidant activities from soybean hulls which are important to our long-term health. In addition, the conditions for extracting proteins from soybean hulls including optimum pH, as well as homogenizing and separation methods for extraction, were also studied. Higher protein content in extracts and recoveries was obtained with extraction at pH 9. Using sieve separation may be an effective way to extract proteins from hulls for industrial applications. The precipitated protein content increased from 51.52% to 59.29% after purification by washing with water once; however, after two washes, no further improvement was shown. The extracted proteins can be used for food applications. The ground hull powders (10% protein), dried supernatant (14% protein) and sediments (7-8% proteins) along with valuable fibers should be good food ingredients for several food categories. This research explored the great potential of converting the low value by-products into value-added functional food uses along with the benefit of reducing food and agricultural wastes.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.377
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
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicPhytoestrogen effects and researchFrench-language works237,207