MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017533022 · doi:10.1038/sj.jim.2900810

Comparison of exopolysaccharide production by strains of Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus paracasei grown in chemically defined medium and milk

2000· article· en· W2017533022 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Dupont, Denis Roy, Gisèle LaPointe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsLactobacillus paracaseiLactobacillus rhamnosusFood scienceLactoseFermentationBacteriaLactic acidLactobacillusStrain (injury)LactobacillaceaeMicrobiologyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exopolysaccharide (EPS) production was compared among three strains of lactobacilli. Lactobacillus rhamnosus strain 9595M can be classified among the highest EPS-producing strains of lactic acid bacteria reported to date with a maximum EPS production of 1275 mg L−1. Under controlled pH, no significant differences in the quantity of EPS produced could be detected between carbon source (glucose or lactose) or fermentation temperature (32 or 37°C). In milk, strains ATCC 9595M and R produced more than 280 mg L−1 EPS whereas strain Type V produced less than 80 mg L−1 EPS. Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology (2000) 24, 251–255.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations74
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Industrial Microbiology & BiotechnologySame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207