MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Flavonoid Content of Phaleria macrocarpa Fruit and Its Proximate Compositions

2023· article· en· W4388044709 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Siti Salwa Abd Gani, Uswatun Hasanah Zaidan, Mohd Izuan Effendi Halmi, Alyaa Nurathirah Abd Halim

Bibliographic record

VenueMalaysian Applied Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicTannin, Tannase and Anticancer Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversiti Putra Malaysia
KeywordsChemistryFlavonoidProximateFood scienceWater contentDry matterBotanyAntioxidantBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flavonoids are one of the compounds in phenolic compounds in fruits. Flavonoids have been documented to modulate or modify lipid peroxidation, free radical scavenging activity, and inhibition of hydrolytic and oxidative enzymes. Flavonoids also influence anti-inflammatory action, anti-tumour, anti-hyperglycemia, anti-viral, anti-microbial, and anti-fungal effects. In this research, flavonoid content in P. macrocarpa fruits was determined, as well as its proximate compositions. To extract flavonoids in the fruit, P. macrocarpa fruits were extracted by the Soxhlet extraction method using aqueous as a solvent. Total flavonoid content in P. macrocarpa fruit extract was 89.89 ± 3.71 mg QE/100 mL. Proximate analyses were conducted to determine the fruit’s moisture content, ash content, dry matter, crude protein, crude fibre, and crude essential oil. Results obtained for proximate composition were 9.45 ± 2.67% (crude protein), 21.633 ± 1.17 (fibre), and 5.605 ± 0.88 (essential oil). Moisture content in this fruit was 88.401 ± 0.749%, the dry matter was 10.96%, and the ash content was 6.33 ± 3.72%. FTIR analysis shows the extract’s functional spectra of phenol, alkane, alkene, and alkyne groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMalaysian Applied BiologySame topicTannin, Tannase and Anticancer ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207