MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021053781 · doi:10.1111/ijfs.12457

Effects of meat p<scp>H</scp> and the initial numbers of spores of <i><scp>C</scp>lostridium estertheticum</i> on the development of blown pack spoilage of vacuum‐packaged beef

2013· article· en· W2021053781 on OpenAlexafffund
Xianqin Yang, Hui Wang, M. Badoni

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAlberta Livestock and Meat Agency
KeywordsSporeFood spoilageFood scienceInoculationChemistryVolume (thermodynamics)Vacuum packingBiologyHorticultureMicrobiologyBacteriaPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary To understand how the initial numbers of Clostridium estertheticum spores on, and the concentration of glucose in meat affect the development of blown pack spoilage, beef of pH ≤5.6 and of pH ≥5.8 was inoculated with the spores at various numbers, vacuum‐packaged and stored at 2 °C. For beef of pH ≤5.6, the volumes of packs inoculated with ≤10 spores did not change; and packs inoculated with ≥30 spores started swelling after 35 days, and the rate of volume increase increased with increasing number of inoculated spores. For beef of pH ≥5.8, packs inoculated 0, three or ten spores slackened, and packs inoculated with ≥30 spores became swollen at the end of storage, but to a much lesser degree than the corresponding packs of beef of pH ≤5.6. Glucose was reduced by 21 mm and depleted in the rinse fluids from swollen packs of beef of pH ≤5.6 and of pH ≥5.8, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207