AVALIAÇÃO DE FENÓLICOS TOTAIS E CAPACIDADE ANTIOXIDANTE DE FARINHA DE CUMBARU APÓS EXTRAÇÃO COM DIFERENTES SOLVENTES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O objetivo deste trabalho foi determinar a composição centesimal de farinha de amêndoa de cumbaru torrada com casca e avaliar o teor de compostos fenólicos totais (CFT) e capacidade antioxidante após extração com diferentes solventes orgânicos. Os solventes utilizados foram: 1) água destilada, 2) acetona 80%, 3) etanol 80%, 4) metanol 80% e 5) mistura contendo metanol 50%, acetona 70% e água. Os solventes foram testados para determinar o melhor extrator de CFT e capacidade antioxidante pelos métodos DPPH, ABTS e FRAP. O alimento apresentou lipídios, carboidratos e proteínas como componentes majoritários de sua composição. A mistura de solventes 5) foi mais eficaz para extração de CFT e na capacidade antioxidante pelos métodos ABTS e FRAP. Porém, no método DPPH, a mistura de solventes 5) e a solução contendo acetona 80% não diferiram entre si. A água como solvente extrator resultou na menor detecção dos compostos. Portanto, o teor de CFT e capacidade antioxidante mostraram-se dependentes do solvente de extração utilizado.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".