Effect of processing on bioaccessibility of carotenoids from orange maize products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary This study assessed the effect of processing including boiling, roasting and fermenting on bioaccessibility of carotenoids (lutein, zeaxanthin, β‐cryptoxanthin, α‐carotene and β‐carotene) from orange maize. Bioaccessibility of carotenoids was analysed using a three‐stage in vitro digestion. High‐performance liquid chromatography was used to analyse the contents of carotenoid compounds in the processed orange maize products and digesta. On average, boiled maize had the highest retention rate (79.0%) of carotenoids followed by fermented porridge (73.8%), fermented maize (68.4%) and unfermented porridge (59.0%). Roasted maize had the lowest retention rate of 56.1%. Without further processing, carotenoids recovery from raw orange maize ranged from 73.0% to 100.5%. After treatments, carotenoids recovery showed varying levels of increase except for fermented maize. The average recovery of carotenoids in whole digesta of boiled maize, roasted maize, fermented porridge and unfermented porridge was 108.5%, 116.9%, 101.9% and 110.7%, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".