MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139050861 · doi:10.1002/aocs.12459

An International Collaborative Study on Trypsin Inhibitor Assay for Legumes, Cereals, and Related Products

2021· article· en· W3139050861 on OpenAlexaff
Keshun Liu, Susan Seegers, Wen‐Ming Cao, Janitha P.D. Wanasundara, Juxing Chen, Alessandro Esteves da Silva, Kristopher Ross, Alexandra Lozano Franco, Theo Vrijenhoek, Pankaj Bhowmik, Yonghui Li, Xin Wu, Scott Bloomer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Oil Chemists Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsPlant Biotechnology InstituteAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsRepeatabilityChromatographyTrypsin inhibitorChemistryReproducibilityAbsorbanceTrypsinMathematicsEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For determining trypsin inhibitor activity (TIA) in soy products, the American Oil Chemists' Society (AOCS) Method Ba 12‐75 has been used. It measures differences in absorbance at 410 nm of bovine trypsin activity toward a synthetic substrate (Nα‐benzoyl‐DL‐arginine‐p‐nitroanilide) in the absence and presence of an inhibitor. Recently, a significantly improved method was developed (JAOCS, 2019, 96:635–645), featuring 5 mL of total assay volume, enzyme‐last sequence, and single inhibitor level in duplicate. It is proposed as the AOCS Method Ba 12a‐2020. As a part of the AOCS method approval process, a collaborative study involving 12 international laboratories was conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed method. The study involved measuring TIA in 10 selected test samples plus a blind duplicate. They included soybeans, pulses, cereals, and their processed products (flours, concentrates, and isolates). After rigorous statistical treatment of the data, only three outliers were removed from the data of two samples. Repeatability relative standard deviations (RSDr) for the 11 samples ranged from 0.99% to 5.52%. Reproducibility RSD (RSDR) ranged from 7.07% to 22.92%, with seven samples having RSDR around 10% or less. The remaining four samples had very low TIA, and their RSDR values ranged from 13.34% to 22.92%. The study has demonstrated reliable performance of the proposed AOCS method. Several collaborators carried out additional experiments addressing some aspects of the method, leading to further refinements. The proposed method is undergoing evaluation by the AOCS Uniform Methods Committee for adoption as an Official Method for measuring TIA in various legume and grain products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Oil Chemists SocietySame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207