Oxidative Stability of Novel Peptides (Linusorbs) in Flaxseed Meal-Fortified Gluten-Free Bread
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flaxseed meal, rich in water-soluble gums, improves the texture of gluten-free (GF) products. Bioactive antioxidant peptides from flaxseed, known as linusorbs (LOs) or cyclolinopeptides, may provide health benefits. However, the stability of flaxseed-derived LOs during dough preparation, baking, and storage remains unclear. To investigate this, GF bread dough and bread were prepared with flaxseed meal, and the LO content was determined in the flaxseed meal, the bread flour with the flaxseed meal, the dough, and the bread. The LO levels were also monitored during storage at various temperatures (−18 °C, 4 °C, and 22–23 °C) for 0, 1, 2, and 4 weeks using high-performance liquid chromatography–diode array detection (HPLC-DAD). The levels of oxidized LOs, such as [1–9-NαC],[1-(Rs,Ss)-MetO]-linusorb B2 (LO14), remained relatively stable in the flaxseed meal and the flour derived from it across under all conditions for up to 4 weeks. Due to microbial contamination, the dough could not be stored at either 4 or 21 °C, and the bread could only be stored at 21 °C for one week. However, the bread and dough could be stored for up to 4 weeks at −18 °C, and the bread at 4 °C, without a significant loss of LOs. The main changes in LOs occurred during processing rather than storage. Reduced LOs were found in higher concentrations in the flour and meal compared to the dough and bread, without a corresponding increase in oxidized LOs. The flaxseed meal-fortified bread maintained oxidative stability when stored at low temperatures. This is the first study to investigate the effect of baking conditions on LO content and antioxidant properties.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".