STUDY OF AFLATOXINS IN CASHEW NUTS PRODUCED IN COTE DIVOIRE BY HIGH PERFORMANCE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY (LCHP)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The objective of this study is to isolate, identify and quantify four types of aflatoxins noted AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, and AFG2 that can be found in cashews grown in Cote dIvoire. These carcinogenic mycotoxins (AF) are secondary metabolite toxins produced by Aspergillus molds in plant foods.This work involved eleven (11) samples of 500 g of cashew nuts from eleven (11) cities of Cote dIvoire for the 2018-2019 campaign. These cities are: Beoumi, Bondoukou, Dabakala, Daloa, Douekoue, Ferkessedougou, Korhogo, Mignignan, Odienne, Sinematiali, and Touba. The test were carried out by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) after extraction of the four (4) mycotoxins on an immunoaffinity column at a flow rate of 3 mL / minute. These aflatoxins were identified and quantified from the following pairs of Retention time (Rt) in minutes and Limit of Detection (LD) in µg / kg: (13.777 0.00143), (10.583  0.00136), (9.901 0.00151), and (8.184 0.00564) respectively for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, and AFG2. Our results show that all eleven (11) samples from these eleven (11) different cities contain aflatoxin (AFB1, AFB2, AFG2 and AFG1) contents below the national standard (2 µg / kg), that of the CODEX Alimentarius (1.4 µg / kg) and that of the European Union (2 µg / kg) indicating that cashews produced in Cote dIvoire comply with international standards and their consumption does not pose any risk to human health caused by the studied aflatoxins.</p>\n\n<p> </p>
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".