MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307044454 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2022-0088

The effects of extrusion on nutrient content of Canadian pulses with a focus on protein and amino acids

2022· article· en· W4307044454 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Cara Cargo-Froom, Rex W. Newkirk, Christopher P. F. Marinangeli, Anna K. Shoveller, Yongfeng Ai, Daniel A Columbus

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of GuelphGenome Prairie
FundersMitacsSaskatchewan Pulse GrowersSwine Innovation Porc
KeywordsExtrusionNutrientMethionineFood scienceIngredientSoybean mealLegumeStarchMealPopulationBiologyAgronomyAmino acidChemistryRaw materialBiochemistryMaterials scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alternative sources of protein will be required in both human and animal nutrition to support ingredient sustainability and nutrient demands of a growing world population. Extrusion is one technique utilized to process pulses and is reported to increase starch and protein digestibility but also has the potential to transform nutrients into non-nutritious compounds. This study sought to compare the effects of extrusion on nutrient composition in Amarillo peas, Dun peas, lentils, chickpeas, and faba beans, with soybean meal (control). Each pulse was extruded at 18% or 22% moisture and 110, 130, or 150 °C. Compared to whole samples, extrusion increased crude protein content of Amarillo and Dun peas, and lentils, and it decreased in soybean meal ( P < 0.05). Compared with whole samples, extrusion increased methionine content in chickpeas and lentils ( P < 0.05), with no effect in Amarillo or Dun peas, faba beans, and soybean meal. Cysteine content increased in extruded Amarillo peas compared with whole pulses, and decreased in soybean meal ( P < 0.05). Results suggest that extrusion can positively affect protein and amino acid content of pulses, however, specific changes differ by pulse/legume type.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207