Optimization of ultrasonic-assisted extraction of astaxanthin from green tiger (Penaeus semisulcatus) shrimp shell
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was aimed at optimizing the astaxanthin extraction efficiency from shrimp shell (green tiger, Penaeus semisulcatus). Astaxanthin was extracted using selected nonpolar/polar solvents (petroleum ether, n-hexane, ethanol, acetone) individually and in ternary mixtures of petroleum ether, acetone, and water in ratios of 15:50:35, 50:45:5, and 15:75:10 for different times (2,4 and 6 h). The results showed that solvents with higher polarity were more suitable for the extraction of astaxanthin, and increasing the extraction time from 2 to 6 h improved the extraction yield. The conditions of extraction of astaxanthin with the desirable solvent were then optimized with the ultrasonic method using the Box-Behnken design [variables included: extraction temperature (25 to 45 °C), extraction time (5 to 15 min), and ultrasound amplitude (20 to 100%)]. Optimal extraction conditions were determined as the ultrasonic amplitude of 23.6%, extraction time of 13.9 min, and extraction temperature of 26.3 °C. Under this optimum condition, the amount of astaxanthin, ferric reducing antioxidant power, and free radical scavenging capacity of the extract were obtained as 51.5%, 1705 μmol of Fe2+/g, and 73.9%, respectively. Extraction and analysis of the extract at the optimum point were used to validate the results.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it