Sensory Evaluation of Dry‐fermented Sausage Containing Ground Deodorized Yellow Mustard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground deodorized yellow mustard is used as a binder and meat protein substitute in cooked processed meat products. Recent studies have shown that it has the potential to be used in uncooked processed meat products because of its natural antimicrobial properties. In the present study, ground deodorized yellow mustard was added to uncooked dry-fermented sausage during manufacture at 1% to 4% (w/w) and analyzed for its effects on starter cultures, physico-chemical properties, and consumer acceptability. Mustard had a nondose-dependent inhibitory effect on the Staphylococcus starter culture, had no effect on water activity or instrumental texture, and tended to accelerate sausage pH reduction. At 3% and 4% mustard, consumer scores on all sensory attributes as well as overall acceptability were significantly lower. The appearance and color of 3% and 4% mustard-treated sausages were liked slightly, whereas flavor, texture, and overall acceptability scores were reduced. The control without mustard and 1% mustard-treated sausages had similar sensory properties and were the most acceptable, while 2% mustard-treated sausages were given "like moderately" and "like slightly" descriptors. Sensory results mean that at concentrations necessary for mandated regulatory control of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in dry sausages, mustard may have a negative effect on consumer acceptance.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".