Microbial Properties of Probiotic Fermented Milk Supplemented with Ginseng Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The therapeutic properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and ginseng extracts have been well documented. The objective of this study was to measure growth and survival of L. rhamnosus GR-1 in milk fortified with ginseng extracts during storage period of 28 days. Five formulations of milk (1% fat) were prepared. Two samples were fortified with alcoholic ginseng extract (AGE: 150 μg/mL, AGE: 500 μg/mL) and the other two samples were fortified with aqueous ginseng extract (QGE: 150 μg/mL, QGE: 500 μg/ml) and one with no ginseng extract (C). The mixtures were autoclaved for 15 min, cooled to 37?C and inoculated with 1% starter culture. The samples were then incubated anaerobically at 37℃ overnight. Selective MRS agar containing 0.015 g/L fusidic acid was used to enumerate L. rhamnosus GR-1 after 1, 14, and 28 d storage at 4℃. All ginseng-fortified samples supported the growth and survival of L. rhamnosus GR-1, as viable counts were detected at each measurement point throughout the 28 d storage period. After 1 d of storage, total colony counts for L. rhamnosus GR-1 in AGE: 150 μg/mL and AGE: 500 μg/mL were 1.3 × 109 and 1.4 × 109 CFU/mL, respectively; probiotic counts in QGE 150 μg/mL and QGE: 500 μg/mL were 1.5 × 109 and 1.4 × 109 CFU/mL, respectively. Additionally, L. rhamnosus GR-1 viability remained stable throughout the 28 days storage period, as no significant decrease (p L. rhamnosus GR-1 can remain viable in presence of ginseng extracts during storage period and there is potential for incorporating ginseng extracts in other probiotic dairy products.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".