MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3199992775 · doi:10.1093/femsle/fnab120

Editorial: microbial food and feed ingredients – functionality and health

2021· editorial· en· W3199992775 sur OpenAlexaff
Egon Bech Hansen, Dennis Sandris Nielsen, Gisèle LaPointe

Notice bibliographique

RevueFEMS Microbiology Letters · 2021
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Guelph
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFood scienceBiotechnologyFood microbiologyBiochemical engineeringChemistryBusinessBiologyBacteriaEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Microbial food and feed ingredients is the topic for a series of MiFFI conferences (https://miffi.org). The first conference, held in Copenhagen in May 2018, gave rise to a thematic issue of FEMS Microbiology Letters (volume 366 issue 11). ‘Microbial food and feed ingredients’ is, in the context of MiFFI, defined as ingredients composed of or produced by microorganisms (Hansen, Nielsen and LaPointe 2019). The fundamental idea behind the MIFFI conferences is to assemble experts working in industry, academia, and government representing the disciplines of fundamental science, product development, consumer analysis and legal aspects of food and feed ingredients. The second MIFFI conference was scheduled for May 2020, but was cancelled due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Although Covid-19 prevented the conference, it did not stop research and development, so we decided to proceed with publishing manuscripts for the MiFFI2020 thematic issue of FEMS Microbiology Letters. The current issue is the result and represents the highlights of this canceled conference. In the absence of the opportunity to meet and interact with experts working on food and feed ingredients from all the multitude of angles necessary to bring new products on the market, we are pleased to present this thematic issue containing four reviews and five research letters presenting original research. The authors are leading experts originating from 15 different countries. The nine papers fall within three major themes: functionality of food cultures, pro- and pre-biotics, and microalgae as feed ingredients. The functionality of food cultures is addressed by four papers. A full-length review by Bourdichon et al. (2021) addresses food preservation by fermentation from the angles of mechanism and safety. Food preservation has probably been the original and primary purpose of food fermentation. The review highlights what we have learned about bioprotecting cultures and it points to what there is still to innovate. The authors come from several universities and research institutes, several manufactures of food cultures and dairy associations. The research letter authored by Zielinska et al. (2021) also addresses antimicrobial activity, showing the characterization of the antimicrobial activity of Lactobacillus strains isolated from traditional fermented cabbage. In addition to acid and hydrogen peroxide production, strains producing bacteriocins or preventing adherence of pathogens were also identified (Zielińska et al. 2021). Formation of texture by food cultures is an important functionality and the identification of optimal strains is a key technology for strain development. The research letter by a group of scientists from one of the leading culture producers, Chr Hansen A/S, describes high throughput screening of texture formation by Leuconostoc and present the genetics of texture formation in Leuconostoc (Poulsen et al. 2020). The ability to grow in the relevant food matrix is a primordial functionality for cultures and is often not addressed specifically. However, the current focus on sustainability and reducing climate change has launched a desire for substituting animal-derived products in our food with plant-derived alternatives. The paper of Madsen et al. (2021) describes the development of cultures for plant based yoghurt alternatives. Pro- and pre-biotics are ingredients with demonstrated health benefits. In total, two mini reviews and two research letters address a number of aspects of this type of ingredient. The triangle of success for developing probiotic products is described in the mini review authored by scientists form one of the largest and leading global ingredients companies, DuPont Nutrition & Biosciencees (recently merged with IFF) (Forssten et al. 2020). The mini review by Dey and Mookherjee describes the emerging field of probiotics to influence mental health via the gut brain axis (Dey and Mookherjee 2021). The research letter by Hansen et al. (2021) describes the use of an in vitro piglet gut model to evaluate the probiotic potential of candidate strains and the research letter by Raba, Adamsberg and Adamsberg (2021) describes the use of an in vitro human gut model to analyse the prebiotic effects of pectin. Microalgae as food and feed ingredients is a rapidly evolving field representing opportunities to improve the sustainability of food and feed production as well as incorporating potential health benefits. The status and outlook for this field is reviewed by Sagaram et al. (2021). The nine papers of this thematic issue fittingly capture the themes of MiFFI, highlighting that the canceled conference would undoubtedly have been a stimulating forum for cross-functional discussion and inspiration. We now hope that the Covid-19 pandemic is under sufficient control to allow us to proceed with the MiFFI-2021 conference in November 2021. We plan to produce a thematic issue of FEMS Microbiology Letters with papers presented at this next conference and papers within the scope of the MiFFI conferences. In anticipation of attending a conference in person, please enjoy the papers of this thematic issue. We look forward to seeing you at MiFFI-2021 or one of the following MiFFI conferences. None declared.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,063

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,019
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0050,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0050,003
Bibliométrie0,0040,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,002
Communication savante0,0090,004
Science ouverte0,0040,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0230,018
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0190,014

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,223
Écart entre enseignants0,209 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueFEMS Microbiology LettersMême sujetProbiotics and Fermented FoodsTravaux en français237 207