Assessment of Protein Nutritional Quality of Novel Hairless Canary Seed in Comparison to Wheat and Oat Using In Vitro Static Digestion Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L.) is a novel true cereal that is now approved for human consumption in Canada and the United States. This true cereal grain has higher protein content (22%) than oat (13%) and wheat (16%) and represents a valuable source of plant proteins. Assessment of canary seed protein quality is therefore essential to evaluate its digestibility and ability to provide sufficient amounts of essential amino acids for human requirements. In this study, the protein nutritional quality of four hairless canary seed varieties (two brown and two yellow) were evaluated in comparison to oat and wheat. The assessment of anti-nutrients contents (phytate, trypsin inhibitor activity, and polyphenols) showed that brown canary seed varieties had the highest content in phytate and oat the highest in polyphenols. Trypsin inhibitor level was comparable among studied cereals, but slightly higher in the brown canary seed Calvi variety. In regard to protein quality, canary seed had a well-balanced amino acid profile and was particularly high in tryptophan, an essential amino acid normally lacking in cereals. The in vitro protein digestibility of canary seeds as determined by both the pH-drop and INFOGEST (international network of excellence on the fate of food in the gastrointestinal tract) protocols appears slightly lower than wheat and higher than oat. The yellow canary seed varieties showed better overall digestibility than the brown ones. For all studied cereal flours, the limiting amino acid was lysine. The calculated in vitro PDCAAS (protein digestibility corrected amino acid score) and DIAAS (digestible indispensable amino acid score) were higher for the yellow C05041 cultivar than the brown Bastia, similar to those of wheat, but lower than those of oat proteins. This study demonstrates the feasibility and utility of in vitro human digestion models for the assessment of protein quality for comparison purpose.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".