Optimization of Wall Materials for Astaxanthin Powder Production from Shrimp Shell Extract Using Simplex Lattice Mixture Design
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shrimp shell waste is an attractive source of value-added bioactive-rich by-products. Shrimp shell extract containing astaxanthin was recovered by solvent extraction method (petroleum ether/acetone/water with a ratio of 15 : 75 : 10) and ultrasound process (amplitude 20% for 15 min at 35°C). The extract was then encapsulated by freeze-drying using wall materials such as maltodextrin (with the dextrose equivalent (DE) of 7 (MD7) and 20 (MD20)) and modified starch (Hi-Cap 100) incorporated at different ratios. Simplex lattice with augmented axial points in the mixture design was applied for the optimization of wall material. The optimal wall materials were 29.4% (MD7), 34.0% (Hi-Cap 100), and 36.6% (MD20), with encapsulation yield (Y) of 94.6%, encapsulation efficiency (EE) of 91.8%, astaxanthin content (Ast) of 46.1 μg/g DW, and DPPH scavenging capacity of 64.0%, respectively. The optimized microcapsules had spongy morphology and brittle and flaky mass. The degradation kinetics of bioactive astaxanthin in UV light was evaluated and found to follow first-order reaction kinetics. The microcapsules obtained under optimal wall composition exhibited the highest UV light stability with half-life values of 76.8 h, demonstrating a high stability.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it