Valorization of berry pomace for extraction of polyphenol compounds and its co-encapsulation with probiotic bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Saskatoon berry pomace, an antioxidant rich byproduct, may be suitable for nutraceuticals and functional foods. The present study aimed to co-encapsulate polyphenol-rich berry extract with probiotics to utilize the polyphenolic compounds present in berry pomace. The major benefit of co-encapsulation is that polyphenolic compounds increase the survival characteristics of probiotic bacteria in gastrointestinal tract. To make the process cost-effective, a conventional solvent extraction method was used for extraction of polyphenolic compounds from berry pomace. Spray drying was used to co-encapsulate polyphenols and probiotics by using plant-based carrier materials (pea protein isolate with gum Arabic). Spray dried powder was evaluated for encapsulation efficiency, gastrointestinal stability, bio-accessibility index, along with functional, structural and thermal characteristics. Berry pomace was found to be a good source of TPC, DPPH and ABTS with 2.49 mg GAE/1 g, 4.48 mg QE/1 g and 2.96 mg QE/1 g, respectively. The encapsulation efficiency (retention of polyphenolics and bacteria in capsules) of polyphenolic compounds and probiotics was 72.6% and 94.4%, respectively. Probiotic cells encapsulated with polyphenolic compounds showed improved survival (9.08 log CFU/mL) during in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. The bio-accessibility of TPC was 63.6% after intestinal digestion. The spray dried powder was observed to possess good thermal stability but poor functional properties, thus limiting applications to products such as bakery goods, sports bars, cereals and other foods where dispersibility is not imperative. Therefore, co-encapsulation by spray drying method offers an efficient and cost-effective method for simultaneous delivery of bioactive compounds and probiotics to the gut, extending their benefits by this combination.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".