MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of cream treatment on phospholipids and protein recovery in butter‐making process

2008· article· en· W2040238953 on OpenAlex
Michel Britten, Sophie Lamothe, Gilles Robitaille

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProteins in Food Systems
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryChromatographySphingomyelinPhospholipidFood scienceDilutionBiochemistryMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A simple approach is proposed to recover native protein and phospholipid fractions from butter‐making process using equipments available in dairy‐processing plant. A washing treatment was used to remove protein from the cream and increase the phospholipids purity in buttermilk. Cream from a first separation was diluted with milk ultrafitration permeate and separated a second time. A 10X dilution factor reduced protein concentration in the cream from 1.6 ± 0.2 to 0.52 ± 0.03%. As a result, the phospholipids to protein ratio in buttermilk increased from 53 ± 10 to 172 ± 7 mg g −1 . In butter‐making process, an important portion of total phospholipids (∼26%) is retained in butter. Butter serum made from washed cream could then be used to produce phospholipid concentrates with phospholipids to protein ratio of 473 ± 3 mg g −1 . Interestingly, the extracts from butter serum are characterised by a higher proportion of sphingomyelin compared with those from buttermilk.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · 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