Wild pink bayberry fruit: the effect of <i>in vitro</i> gastrointestinal digestion on phytochemical profiles, and antioxidant and antiproliferative activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The regular consumption of polyphenol-rich foods is essential to prevent the onset of diseases. Wild fruits are known to possess higher levels of bioactive components than the domesticated fruits because of the severe environmental conditions they are grown in. The aim of this study was to evaluate the phytochemical profiles, and antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of a wild pink bayberry fruit after in vitro digestion and to compare them with results obtained with a chemical extraction method. A low release of total phenolics and anthocyanins was observed after digestion compared with chemical extraction, while more flavonol contents were found by HPLC analysis. The digesta samples demonstrated low levels of extracellular antioxidant activity (EAA) and cellular antioxidant activity (CAA). However, the cellular uptake rate was increased during the in vitro digestion, and the largest value of 75.35% was obtained in the colon step. Notably, the antiproliferative activity in the colon digesta (10.14 ± 0.13 mg mL-1) was close to that of extracts (7.6 ± 0.63 mg mL-1). Pearson correlation analysis revealed that EAA and CAA were significantly correlated with TPC, while the antiproliferative activity was significantly correlated with the total contents of three flavonol compounds (quercetin, kaempferol, and myricetin). Our observations provide new insights into the bioactivity variation of whole fruits as affected by simulated digestion.
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 | 0.000 | 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".