MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292295867 · doi:10.1007/s42976-022-00297-8

A simplified low volume colorimetric assay for rapid comparison of cyanogenic glycoside production between barley genotypes

2022· article· en· W4292295867 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shiming Xue, Jennifer L. Zantinge, Michael D. Holtz, P. E. Juskiw

Bibliographic record

VenueCereal Research Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCassava research and cyanide
Canadian institutionsOlds CollegeAgriculture Food and Rural Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHordeum vulgareChemistryReagentFood scienceBiologyBotanyPoaceaeOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ethyl carbamate (EC), a genotoxic and carcinogenic compound, is an undesirable trace component in spirits and whisky. The precursor of EC produced from barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) malt is primarily a cyanogenic glycosidic nitrile (GN) known as epiheterodendrin (EPH). EPH production is genetically controlled in barley, low or non-GN varieties exist and EPH production can be controlled by using low or non-GN barley varieties for malt production. Here, we report on a rapid and inexpensive colorimetric assay modified from Cook and Oliver (in: European Brewery Convention (eds) Proceedings of the 23rd Congress, Lisbon. European Brewery Convention, Zoeterwoude, Netherlands, 1991). The new low-volume, high-throughput, semi-quantitative test method can be used for the selection of low or non-GN breeding lines through samples of acrospires. This method is based on the detection of cyanide by the reaction with chloramine-T followed by the addition of the reagent (pyridine-barbituric acid) to form a soluble violet-blue product measured at 590 nm. Absorbance measurements and the visual color are used to estimate the presence of EPH production in acrospires. In this report, the level of EPH production was compared among some commercial European non-GN lines, Canadian malt varieties and advanced barley breeding lines.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.232
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCereal Research CommunicationsSame topicCassava research and cyanideFrench-language works237,207