Analysis of sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia) proanthocyanidins by complementary and newly developed techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sainfoin proanthocyanidins (PAs) are complex mixtures of homo- and hetero- polymers consisting of B-type procyanidins and prodelphinidins. Direct analysis by thiolytic degradation revealed a wide range of PA contents and compositions within the HealthyHay germplasm collection (46 accessions). PA contents varied from 0.57% to 2.80% (g PAl100g freeze-dried samples). PAs polymer size ranged from 12 to 84 flavan-3-ol units in terms of their mean degree of polymerisation. Prodelphinidin/procyanidin ratios ranged from 53/47 to 95/5 and trans/cis ratios varied from 12/88 to 34/66. Purified PAs fractions from 4 selected accessions showed a positive correlation between polymer size and prodelphinidin content within each accession (R2 from 0.69 to 0.92). Careful selection of MALDI-TOF MS matrices and analytical conditions made it possible to detect PAs up to 12 subunits and also ion signals that could be assigned to A-type and rarely reported glycosylated A-type PAs. For detecting and confirming the polymer size of underivatised higher molecular weight PAs a new HPLC-GPC technique consisting in a single calibration curve for galloyl glucoses, ellagitannins and PAs was developed. Peak-average molecular weights of sainfoin PA fractions were overestimated by 42.0% at 2436 Dalton and underestimated by 13.9% at 8318 Dalton. Number-average molecular weights were overestimated by 30.0% and underestimated by 25.8%, respectively. Cluster analysis of the HealthyHay germplasm collection revealed that accessions clustered into two main clusters, Western Europe and Eastern Europe/Asia, and that accessions from Armenia, Canada and USA clustered into another group. This seems to be in agreement with the strong links between geographic origin and accession performance found in the HealthyHay sainfoin germplasm. This research made significant contributions to the fields of PA analysis and germplasm screening in terms of novel analytical techniques for determining the average molecular weight distribution, content, subunit composition and linkages, purification and fractionation of proanthocyanidins in sainfoin.
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 | 0.001 | 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".