Evaluating the quality characteristics of intermediate wheatgrass grown in the Canadian prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objectives Intermediate wheatgrass (IWG) is an underutilized perennial grain in the Canadian market with excellent nutritional and environmental benefits. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the growing environment on the physiochemical and functional properties of IWG grown in three different growing locations in the Canadian prairies. IWG flours were compared between growing locations and years as well as alongside Canada Western Red Spring Wheat whole meal (CWRS‐WM) and refined flour. Findings The proximate composition of IWG flours between years and growing locations had significant ( p < .05) differences for protein, fiber, and ash content but showed little difference for starch content. Owing to differences in proximate composition, variances in mixing parameters, starch pasting properties, and protein profiles were observed. Overall IWG performed poorly in a bread system at 100% incorporation largely due to its lack of high molecular weight glutenin. Conclusion Understanding the impacts that growing location and year have on the proximate composition and therefore working parameters will aid in the development of new wheat products fortified with IWG. These products will contribute to a more resilient and diverse food system, that will provide nutrient‐dense food options for consumers. Significance and Novelty There is very limited research on IWG grown in the Canadian prairies, and this study is among the first studies focused on characterizing IWG grown in Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".