MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039992711 · doi:10.5380/cep.v23i1.1276

PESQUISA MICOTOXICOLÓGICA DE PRODUTOS AVÍCOLAS IN NATURA E PROCESSADOS

2005· article· pt· W2039992711 on OpenAlexaff
Tânia Lúcia Montenegro Stamford, Elisa Alves Vilar, S.T.G. Bastos, CELIANE G. M. SILVA

Bibliographic record

VenueBoletim do Centro de Pesquisa de Processamento de Alimentos · 2005
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsNutrasource
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOchratoxin AMycotoxinAflatoxinBiologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analisou-se a ocorrência de aflatoxinas e ocratoxina A em carcaças, vísceras comestíveis e processadas de aves de empresas que representam diferentes regiões de produção avícola do Brasil. Diferentes tipos de produtos foram coletados, trimestralmente, sendo nove “in natura” e oito processados para extração de micotoxinas e quantificação pelo ensaio imunoenzimático (ELISA). Amostras positivas pelo método ELISA foram analisadas por cromatografia em camada delgada (CCD). Do total de amostras analisadas 12% foram positivas, sendo 10,8% para aflatoxina total e 1,2% para ocratoxina A. Os resultados obtidos pela CCD mostraram contaminação por aflatoxinas (B1, B2, G1 e G2) em concentração inferior a 5 µg/kg. O ensaio imunoenzimático (ELISA) mostrou-se mais eficaz para produtos “in natura”, sendo isolada maior quantidade de aflatoxinas e ocratoxina A no segundo trimestre (julhosetembro). A ocorrência de aflatoxina total foi mais freqüente em produtos oriundos das empresas avícolas das diferentes regiões do estado de Pernambuco e ocratoxina A das empresas produtoras das Regiões Sul e Sudeste do Brasil. MYCOTOXICOLOGICAL RESEARCH OF POULTRY “IN NATURE” AND PROCESSED PRODUCTS Abstract The occurrence of aflatoxins and ochratoxin A in carcasses, edible viscera and poultry processed products purchased from different industries of various Brazilian regions was evaluated. Different types of products were collected in a trimester period being nine of them “in nature” and eight processed, for extraction of mycotoxins and quantified through the immunoenzymatic assay (ELISA). Samples with positive results for ELISA were analyzed using thin layer chromatography (TLC). From the total analyzed samples 12% resulted positive, being 10.8% for total aflatoxins, and 1.2% for ochratoxin A. The results obtained by TLC showed aflatoxins contamination (B1, B2, G1 and G2) inferior to 5µg/kg. The immunoenzymatic assay was more effective for “in nature” products, and the second trimester (July - September) was the period when it was isolated the highest quantity of aflatoxins and ochratoxin A. The occurrence of total aflatoxins was more evident in the poultry industries from different regions of the state of Pernambuco, and ochratoxin A from industries in the South and Southeast regions of Brazil.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBoletim do Centro de Pesquisa de Processamento de AlimentosSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207