MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009539124 · doi:10.1177/1082013206063735

Microbiology of Fresh-cut Mangoes Prepared from Fruit Sanitised in Hot Chlorinated Water

2006· article· en· W2009539124 on OpenAlexaff
M. Ngarmsak, Pascal Delaquis, P.M.A. Toivonen, Tipvanna Ngarmsak, B. Ooraikul, Giuseppe Mazza

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Science and Technology International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood spoilageMangiferaChlorineYeastFleshFood scienceMicroorganismChemistryContaminationBacteriaHorticultureBiologyBotanyEcologyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole mangoes ( Mangifera indica, cv. Chok Anun) were washed in water with or without chlorine (100 mg total chlorine/L) at 11.7 ºC and 50 ºC before slicing and packaging. Microbiological analysis of the whole fruit showed that the stem scar contained larger populations of microorganisms than the skin. Washing reduced populations at both sites and the effect was enhanced by the addition of chlorine and heating of the wash water. None of the treatments prevented transfer of contaminants to the flesh during slicing, and evidence of spoilage in the form of discrete fungal colonies was observed in samples stored for 1 week at 5 ºC. Several species of bacteria, yeast and mould were recovered from packaged slices, but yeast and moulds accounted for the bulk of the spoilage of microflora. Barriers to the growth of these microorganisms may be necessary to reduce the risk of microbial spoilage of mango slices manufactured under commercial conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Science and Technology InternationalSame topicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFrench-language works237,207