Phenolic profiles and antioxidant activities of Saskatchewan (Canada) bred haskap ( <i>Lonicera caerulea)</i> berries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Phenolic extracts from five Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, bred and grown haskap berry varieties (Aurora, Blizzard, Honey Bee, Indigo Gem, and Tundra) were characterized via liquid chromatography with photodiode array detection (HPLC-PDA) and mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS). Tundra had the highest phenolic content (727.0 mg/100 g FW) while Indigo Gem had the highest anthocyanin content (447.8 mg/100 g FW). HPLC-MS/MS identified two previously unreported anthocyanins (Tundra variety): delphinidin-sambubioside and a peonidin-pentoside. Fruit extracts were fractionated to produce an anthocyanin rich (40% ethanol) and flavanol/flavonol rich (100% ethanol) fraction. This process affords the ability to isolate/concentrate specific subclasses for nutraceutical applications. High in vitro radical scavenging was observed for all haskap phenolic extracts. An extract from the Tundra variety delayed borage oil oxidation more effectively than commercial antioxidants (BHT and Rosamox). These results show the high phenolic content of these haskaps along with their capacity for radical scavenging/delaying lipid oxidation, indicating potential commercial value.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".