MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405482970 · doi:10.1080/10408398.2024.2437573

Structure and degradation dynamics of dietary pectin

2024· review· en· W4405482970 on OpenAlexaff
Ecem Yüksel, Remco Kort, Alphons G. J. Voragen

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell Walls
Canadian institutionsMaple Leaf Foods
FundersPurdue University
KeywordsPectinPrebioticDietary fiberBiologyDepolymerizationBiochemistryFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pectin, a complex dietary fiber, constitutes a key structural component of the cell walls of numerous edible plant products. It is resistant to digestion by human enzymes and undergoes depolymerization and saccharification in the gastrointestinal tract through the action of carbohydrate-active enzymes (CAZymes) produced by gut microbiota. This enzymatic breakdown generates intermediate structural fragments, which are subsequently converted into pectin oligosaccharides (POS) and monosaccharides. POS exhibit prebiotic properties and have demonstrated potential health benefits, including anti-carcinogenic effects, mucoadhesive capabilities, and the promotion of beneficial gut bacterial growth. However, the current understanding of the molecular structure of pectin and its degradation dynamics remains fragmented within the literature, impeding progress in dietary fiber intervention research and the development of personalized nutrition approaches. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the structural features of pectin and the intricate breakdown mechanisms orchestrated by CAZymes. It underscores the complex architecture of pectin that influences its breakdown dynamics and specifies the enzymatic requirements for the cleavage of its diverse structural components. These insights complement our accompanying review on the structure-function relationships between pectin and the human gut microbiota, previously published in this journal.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in Food Science and NutritionSame topicPolysaccharides and Plant Cell WallsFrench-language works237,207