Performance of Starch Gels on In Vitro Enzymatic Hydrolysis Assessed by Rheological Methodologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Starch hydrolysis is attracting much attention due to its relationship to digestion and glucose release. The objective is to propose rapid and continuous analytical methods that allow measuring gels hydrolysis following apparent viscosity (μ). Three different starches (corn, wheat, and rice) are tested recording starch gelatinization followed by gels digestions (digestograms) using a rapid‐visco analyzer (RVA) or a rheometer. Results are compared with those obtained by measuring glucose release along hydrolysis. A modified first‐order kinetic model in the RVA (R2 > 0.99) and rheometer (R2 > 0.99) describes the gels digestograms. Wheat gel shows a higher hydrolysis rate (k), which indicates faster digestion followed by rice and corn gels. The proposed models allow rapid analysis of starch digestograms, allowing to discriminate among hydrolysis rate of different starches. These less time‐consuming methods can be an option to continuously analyze starch gelatinization followed by enzymatic digestion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".