Growth and morphology of thermophilic dairy starters in alginate beads.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research was to produce concentrated biomasses of thermophilic lactic starters using immobilized cell technology (ICT). Fermentations were carried out in milk using pH control with cells microentrapped in alginate beads. In the ICT fermentations, beads represented 17% of the weight. Some assays were carried out with free cells without pH control, in order to compare the ICT populations with those of classical starters. With Streptococcus thermophilus, overall populations in the fermentor were similar, but maximum bead population for (8.2 x 10(9) cfu/g beads) was 13 times higher than that obtained in a traditional starter (4.9 x 10(8) cfu/ml). For both Lactobacillus helveticus strains studied, immobilized-cell populations were about 3 x 10(9) cfu/g beads. Production of immobilized Lb. bulgaricus 210R strain was not possible, since no increases in viable counts occurred in beads. Therefore, production of concentrated cell suspension in alginate beads was more effective for S. thermophilus. Photomicrographs of cells in alginate beads demonstrated that, while the morphology of S. thermophilus remained unchanged during the ICT fermentation, immobilized cells of Lb. helveticus appeared wider. In addition, cells of Lb. bulgaricus were curved and elongated. These morphological changes would also impair the growth of immobilized lactobacilli.
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 | 0.001 | 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".