Interactions between Ascophyllum nodosum Seaweeds Polyphenols and Native and Gelled Corn Starches
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
seaweed flour (AF) and corn starch (CS) on the interactions between polyphenols and starch was studied in this paper. These methods comprised the blending of AF with native starch (NT) with previously gelled starch gel (GL) and promoting the gelling of corn starch in the presence of AF (CGL). Different AF-CS (g/g) ratios (from 1:0.5 to 1:25) were studied. The liquid phase was chemically characterized by polyphenols (TPC) and carbohydrates content. The antioxidant activity of the liquid phase after achieving the solid-liquid equilibrium was determined by DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP methods. The solid phase was characterized by FT-IR and SEM techniques. The Halsey model successfully fitted the equilibrium TPC in liquid and polyphenols adsorbed/retained by the solid phase of tested systems. NT samples showed lower polyphenols sorption than gelled samples. The differences found between samples obtained with GL and CGL methods suggested different interactions between polyphenols and starch. Specifically, physisorption is predominant in the case of the GL method, and molecular trapping of polyphenols in the starch gel structure is relevant for the CGL method. Results allowed us to determine the enhancement of the retention of polyphenols to achieve starchy foods with high bioactivity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it