Enzymatic lipophilization of bioactive compounds with high antioxidant activity: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food products contain bioactive compounds such as phenolic and polyphenolic compounds and vitamins, resulting in a myriad of biological characteristics such as antimicrobial, anticarcinogenic, and antioxidant activities. However, their application is often restricted because of their relatively low solubility and stability in emulsions and oil-based products. Therefore, chemical, enzymatic, or chemoenzymatic lipophilization of these compounds can be achieved by grafting a non-polar moiety onto their polar structures. Among different methods, enzymatic modification is considered environmentally friendly and may require only minor downstream processing and purification steps. In recent years, different systems have been suggested to design the synthetic reaction of these novel products. This review presents the new trends in this area by summarizing the essential enzymatic modifications in the last decade that led to the synthesis of bioactive compounds with attractive antioxidative properties for the food industry by emphasizing on optimization of the reaction conditions to maximize the production yields. Lastly, recent developments regarding characterization, potential applications, emerging research areas, and needs are highlighted.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".