Effect of drying techniques on the retention of antioxidant activities of Saskatoon berries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this research was to compare the retention of antioxidant activity and total anthocyanin content of Saskatoon berries dried by freeze drying, microwave-vacuum drying, thin layer hot air drying and vacuum drying. Antioxidant activity of berry samples was determined by DPPH radical scavenging and ABTS radical scavenging, and the pH differential method was used to determine total anthocyanin content of the berry samples. The results showed that the freeze dried Saskatoon berries exhibited the highest retention of anthocyanin and antioxidant activity among the dried samples, followed by microwave-vacuum dried berries, thin layer hot air dried berries and vacuum dried berries. There were significant differences between the berry samples at P<0.05. DPPH radical scavenging and ABTS radical scavenging were correlated linearly with an R2 value of 0.99 at P<0.05 showing their effectiveness for the determination of the antioxidant activity of the Saskatoon berries. However, the DPPH radical scavenging assay was more effective than the ABTS radical scavenging assay. The results also showed that antioxidant activity of the berries was highly correlated with the total anthocyanin content of the fruit. The reduction of anthocyanin in dried berry samples was linearly correlated with the reduction of DPPH radical scavenging with an R2 value of 0.97 at P<0.05 and, also, linearly correlated with the reduction of ABTS radical scavenging with an R2 value of 0.88 at P<0.05.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".