MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037768296 · doi:10.5539/jfr.v3n3p45

The Effect of Starter Cultures on the Portuguese Traditional Sausage “Paio do Alentejo” in Terms of Its Sensory and Textural Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Profile

2014· article· en· W2037768296 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miguel Elías, Maria Eduarda Potes, L.C. Roseiro, C. Santos, Ana Cristina Agulheiro‐Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsStarterLactobacillus sakeiStaphylococcus xylosusFood scienceSensory analysisLactobacillusChemistryBreedFermentationAnimal scienceBiologyStaphylococcusBacteriaStaphylococcus aureus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Paio do Alentejo” is a Portuguese dry-cured sausage, made with meat from the Alentejano pig breed. The main aim of this study is to evaluate the benefits of the use of starter cultures on the quality of the sausage, mainly with regard to its sensory properties, rheological characteristics and PAH profile. Three batches of the product were examined: S1-inoculated with a commercial starter comprising Lactobacillus spp., Micrococcaceae and yeasts; S2-inoculated with a starter comprising Lactobacillus sakei and Staphylococcus xylosus; C-the control batch, was not inoculated. A sensory panel of 12 experts analysed samples in accordance with a descriptive analysis using a structured scale. A Texture Profile Analysis and 16 EPA priority PAHs for dry fermented sausages were performed. Both inoculated batches were well received by the judges, no significant differences being noted between them. The use of S2 led to a slight improvement in terms of cohesiveness. However, the use of starter cultures was not found to influence PAH content.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ResearchSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207