MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979175033 · doi:10.1139/w06-058

Use of microbial antagonism to reduce pathogen levels on produce and meat products: a review

2006· review· en· W1979175033 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
M Kostrzyńska, A Bachand

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsListeria monocytogenesFood scienceFood spoilageBiologyMicroorganismSalmonellaClostridium botulinumPathogenMicrobiologyFood microbiologyListeriaBacteriaBiotechnologyAntagonismEscherichia coliBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are often utilized to control food-borne pathogens on produce and on cooked, fermented, or refrigerated meats. Most research to date has focused on the inhibition of Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella, Clostridium botulinum, and spoilage microorganisms. LAB are excellent candidates for reducing pathogen levels on foods because they inhibit the growth of these microorganisms through various mechanisms without causing unacceptable sensory changes. This review provides an up-to-date look at research directed at maximizing the use of LAB by selecting the most appropriate strains, by learning how to apply them to foods most effectively, and by gaining an understanding of the mechanism by which they inhibit pathogens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207