MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021519757 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v1n3p178

Comparison of Conventional and Rapid Methods for Salmonella Detection in Artisanal Minas Cheese

2012· article· en· W2021519757 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gardênia Márcia Silva Campos Mata, Maria Cristina Dantas Vanetti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais
KeywordsSalmonellaFood scienceRaw milkChemistryBiologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artisanal cheeses traditionally produced from raw milk have a diverse microbiota and, due the varied changes that occur in this type of food matrix during the maturation, pathogens detection’s may be impaired. In this study, the conventional method established by ISO 6579:2005 to evaluate the presence of Salmonella was compared with two alternative rapid methods, PCR-BAX® (DuPont) and VIDAS®-SLM (BioMérieux), to analyze artisanal Minas cheese, a typical Brazilian product. Salmonella was not detected by conventional or PCR-BAX® in 63 artisanal Minas cheese samples analyzed. Although highly specific and accurate, the immunoassay (VIDAS®-SLM) presented 3.17% of false positives. Good manufactures practices were absent in some producers of Minas artisanal cheese and, the fact of Salmonella was not detected in analyzed samples should be related with presence of high and diverse endogenous microbiota, including approximately, 107 CFU.g-1 of lactic bacteria, and a low pH and water activity, conditions that can minimize pathogens growth, provide cellular injury and hamper the recovery strategies.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207