Effect of Shrimp Processing Procedures on the Quality and Quantity of Extracted Chitin from the Shells of Northern Shrimp <i>Pandalus borealis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of various shrimp processing procedures on the quality and quantity of extracted chitin from the shells of Northern Species Pandalus borealis was investigated. The shrimp were caught from the Northern Shrimp Fishery in 2001 and processed using two different procedures. The first procedure involved cooking in boiling salt water on board the vessel, then packing on ice until delivery for peeling at an inshore peeling plant. The second procedure involved quick freezing of individual shrimp, followed by delivery for cooking and peeling in an inshore plant. Deproteinization, demineralization, and pigment removal procedures were developed for chitin extraction. The results showed that processing procedures of shrimp can result in a variation in chitin yield of up to 85% and can significantly affect the organic matter and ash contents as well as the mineral profile in the shell waste and extracted chitin. Quick freezing of individual shrimp on board of vessels followed by inshore cooking and peeling results in shell waste that produced a high yield of chitin with superior quality.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".