High amylose maize starch can produce an inclusion complex with extract of medicinal plants of <i>Amphipterygium adstringent</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objective The interaction between starch and polyphenol would increase the bioaccessibility of those bioactive compounds. Previous studies have been conducted with pure polyphenols, but the use of medicinal plants, rich in bioactive compounds, able to complex with starch, is growing. The present study aimed to analyze the complex formation between the extract of a medicinal plant ( Amphipterygium adstringent , AA) and high amylose starch (HA). The total polyphenol content (TPC), and antioxidant capacity (AC), besides X‐ray diffraction pattern, differential scanning calorimetry, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and starch hydrolysis rate were evaluated in the AA‐HA and compared with those of the complex gallic acid (GA)‐HA. Findings The AA‐HA complex had higher TPC than GA‐HA, despite their rather similar AC. The increased crystallinity and short‐range order of the HA confirmed the formation of the complex with AA. This complex required higher enthalpy (2.0 J/g) than its respective HA control (0.52 J/g) for the gelatinization and the in vitro starch hydrolysis suggests the formation of resistant starch. Conclusion The extract of medicinal plants can form complexes with amylose, which has antioxidant properties, besides increasing the resistant starch. Significance and Novelty Complex formation between HA and extract of medicinal plants is feasible for increasing the release of the bioactive compounds after digestion.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".