MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394911901 · doi:10.1016/j.fochx.2024.101397

Evaluation of digestibility, solubility, and surface properties of trehalose-conjugated quinoa proteins prepared via pH shifting technique

2024· article· en· W4394911901 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Alrosan, Ali Almajwal, Ali Al‐Qaisi, Sana Gammoh, Muhammad H. Alu’datt, Farah R. Al Qudsi, Thuan‐Chew Tan, Ammar A. Razzak Mahmood, Sofyan Maghaydah, Motasem Al-Massad

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Chemistry X · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProteins in Food Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversiti Sains MalaysiaJordan University of Science and TechnologyKing Saud University
KeywordsSolubilityChemistryTrehaloseConjugated systemCovalent bondThermal stabilityAmideBiophysicsChemical engineeringPolymerOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soluble trehalose-conjugated quinoa proteins (T-QPs) were effectively prepared using the pH-shifting mechanism. The structural properties of the T-QPs were evaluated using a comparative evaluation, which included analyzing the amide I, surface charge and hydrophobicity, protein conformation, thermal stability, and protein structures. The results suggested that the development of the T-QPs was influenced mainly by no-covalent bonds. These interactions significantly influenced (P < 0.05) the quinoa proteins' conformation and higher-protein structure. T-QP had significant (P < 0.05) surface properties. Furthermore, the T-QPs exhibited improved solubility (79.7 to 88.4%) and digestibility (79.8 to 85.1%). Therefore, quinoa protein proved an excellent plant-based protein for conjugation with disaccharides. These findings provide significant insight into the potential development of modified proteins with enhanced solubility and digestibility by creating trehalose-conjugated plant-based proteins.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Chemistry XSame topicProteins in Food SystemsFrench-language works237,207