Raspberry and Strawberry Addition Improves Probiotic Viability in Yogurt and Possess Antioxidant Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This study aimed to i) investigate probiotic potentials of raspberry and strawberry addition in yogurts, ii) explore antioxidant activity of berries extracted by microwave using oxygen radical absorbance (ORAC), and 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryhydrazyl radical (DPPH) as well as iii) determine the total phenolic content (TPC) of the berries. The probiotic potentials of those berry additions into yogurts containing different probiotics were determined by subsequent viable microorganism counts in each yogurt trial using selective media, pH and total titratable acidity (TTA) during 28 days of cold storage at 4ºC. Viable microbial counts in yogurt trials containing probiotic <em>Lactobacillus acidophilus </em>and raspberry increased (P&lt;0.05) for 21 consecutive days of cold storage. The pH levels decreased (P&lt;0.05) as the TTA increased over 28 days of cold storage in all yogurts containing the berries. ORAC results showed that raspberry had higher antioxidant activity (505.72 µmol TE/100g of fruit) than strawberry (495 µmol TE/100g of fruit). Also, DPPH scavenging activity results showed that raspberry (86.11%) had higher antioxidant activity than strawberry (85.69%). There was not a significant (P&lt;0.05) difference in TPC values of raspberry (0.20 g GAE/kg) and strawberry (0.18 g GAE/kg). This study suggests that both berries have potential as a source of prebiotics with antioxidant activity for future functional foods and nutraceutical applications.</p>
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 | 0.002 | 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 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".