Safety evaluation of oubli fruit sweet protein (brazzein) derived from <i>K</i><i>omagataella phaffii,</i> intended for use as a sweetener in food and beverages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Naturally sweet proteins have no glycemic effect and offer a fundamentally new approach to sweetness and health for individuals seeking to reduce their added sugar intake. However, unlike many commercial sweeteners, little research has been performed on the potential safety implications of adding these uniquely sweet proteins to food and beverages. In this study, a naturally sweet protein found in the West African Oubli plant ( Pentadiplandra brazzeana), referred to as Oubli fruit sweet protein or brazzein, was expressed in Komagataella phaffii (formerly Pichia pastoris) and produced via precision fermentation, and a safety and risk assessment was undertaken for its use as a sweetener in food and beverages. Potential consumption levels of brazzein were estimated to be 3 mg/kg body weight/day based on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The safety of brazzein derived from K. phaffii was evaluated through in silico allergenicity, in vitro genotoxicity (reverse mutation and mammalian micronucleus assays), and a 90-day dietary oral toxicity study in rats. There was no indication of allergenicity in the in silico analyses. Brazzein was non-genotoxic in the in vitro assays and showed no adverse effects in the 90-day oral toxicity study up to the highest dose tested, where the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) was 978 and 985 mg/kg body weight/day in males and females, respectively. The totality of evidence in the in silico allergenicity, in vitro genotoxicity, and 90-day dietary toxicity studies demonstrates that brazzein derived from K. phaffii is considered safe for use as a sweetener in food and beverages.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".