MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017891583

Characterization Of Chemical, Nutritional, And Techno-functional Properties of Protein-rich Fractions Obtained From Canola Cold-pressed Cake

2024· dissertation· en· W7017891583 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaFractionationMealSoybean mealSolubilitySugarHexaneFraction (chemistry)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study explored proteins of canola cold-pressed cake (CCC) for value-addition prospects. The protein and fiber fractionation developed by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) was applied to CCC as-it-is (N-CCC) and after de-oiling with ethanol (E-CCM) or hexane (H-CCM). De-oiling with hexane and ethanol provided < 1% oil containing meal with protein levels of 40.6% in E-CCM, 35.4% in H-CCM compared to 31.1% in N-CCC. The fractionation generated two protein-rich and three fiber-rich fractions of each meal. The napin protein isolates (NPI) had the highest protein content (96.2%-97.9%) followed by cruciferin protein concentrates (CPC) (55.3%-74.2%) and intermediate protein fractions (IPF) (25.2%-29.7%). The soluble sugar rich fractions (SSF), and seed coat fractions (SCF) had 15.0%-16.3% and 21.4%-24.7% protein, respectively. These fractions recovered 99.8%-99.9% of total meal dry matter and 102.4%-102.7% of starting meal protein. Total phenolic content (TPC) was found to be 1.3-1.4 mg/g in N-CCC, E-CCM, and H-CCM, and NPI from N-CCC showed higher TPC than the other fractions. De-oiling did not affect meal phytate content (2.5-3.0 g/100g). The IPF of all meals had higher phytate values (15.3-19.3g/100g) than other fractions. The amino acid composition of the meals and their respective protein fractions followed their signature compositions. The presence of napin and cruciferin in NPI and CPC, respectively was confirmed. Selected functional properties of NPI and CPC of all three meals were studied. Proteins of NPI gave solubility values of 80-100% at pH 4.0, 7.4, and 9.5, regardless of the meal origin while CPC had values between 14-59%. The surface hydrophobicity values and negative zeta potential values of proteins in CPC were larger than NPI. Both NPI and CPC of all meals had higher oil holding capacity than commercial soy protein isolates at the same protein level but lower water holding capacity for CPC (<2.2 g/g protein). NPI emulsified more oil than CPC under the conditions of 0.5 M NaCl, and 10% sucrose, regardless of the meal origin, however, the stability of formed emulsions was similar. NPI of ethanol de-oiled meal exhibited better foaming properties at pH 4.0 than N-CCC with a foam capacity and stability similar to commercial whey protein isolate at equal protein level. The proteins of NPIs showed denaturation temperatures that aligned with constituent proteins and denatured completely at ~100ºC. The AAFC meal fractionation process can successfully be applied to CCC with or without defatting to obtain highly pure NPI, however, product composition and functional characteristics of CPC fraction depend on the residual oil that is portioned from the meal. This process allows obtaining protein-rich products from CCC with unique protein types and functional 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.155 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207