Unique heterocyclic phenolic compounds from shrimp (Pandalus borealis) and beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Shrimps are the most consumed species among crustaceans and are well appreciated for their flavor and high nutritional value. This work investigated the antioxidative compounds of Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) and its processing discards (shells and heads) using various solvents and chromatographic techniques as well as mass spectrometry. Ethanol served as the best extraction medium, and the extracts obtained demonstrated strong antioxidant activity in a β-carotene-linoleate emulsion system. The antioxidative compounds of the extract were isolated using a silica gel column chromatography, followed by thin layer chromatography. This led to the identification of two highly polar and two low polarity compounds. These compounds, for the first time, were isolated and purified by using reversed-phase HPLC. Their structures were tentatively elucidated using electrospray mass spectrometry. These unique compounds were heterocyclic phenolic compounds and identified as 7-(3-butenyl)-2-hydroxy-6-(1,2,5,6-tetrahydropyridin-2-yl) quinoline and 7-(3-butenyl)-2-hydroxy-6-(1,2,5,6-tertahydropyridin-2-yl)-7,8-dihydroquinoline and their isomers. The proposed novel compounds in shrimp provide a reason for their oxidative stability and potential benefits, as well as possibly serving as substrates for the discoloration of shrimp. Graphical Abstract
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".