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

<p>“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.</p> <p>Three batches of the product were examined: S1-inoculated with a commercial starter comprising <em>Lactobacillus</em> spp., <em>Micrococcaceae </em>and yeasts; S2-inoculated with a starter comprising <em>Lactobacillus sakei </em>and <em>Staphylococcus xylosus</em>; C-the control batch, was not inoculated.</p> <p>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.</p> <p>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.</p>

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
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 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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