MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043860412 · doi:10.2202/1556-3758.1058

Inactivation of <i>Escherichia Coli</i> 0157:H7 and <i>Salmonella Enteritidis</i> in Liquid Egg Using Continuous Pulsed Electric Field System

2006· article· en· W2043860412 on OpenAlexafffund
Malek Amiali, Michael Ngadi, James P. Smith, Vijaya Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSalmonella enteritidisEscherichia coliElectric fieldInoculationMicrobiologyIntensity (physics)EnterobacteriaceaeChemistrySalmonellaFood scienceBacteriaAnalytical Chemistry (journal)BiologyChromatographyPhysicsBiochemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sought to evaluate the effect of PEF parameters such as electric field intensity and number of pulses on the inactivation of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella Enteritidis suspended in liquid whole egg. The medium was inoculated with 108 CFU ml-1 of E. coli O157:H7 or S. Enteritidis and was treated continuously at 10, 20 or 30°C using electric field intensity of either 20 or 30 kV cm-1. A biphasic instant reversal PEF waveform with up to 105 pulses of 2 µs in width was applied. Bacterial inactivation increased with increasing applied electric field intensity, number of pulses and processing temperature. Maximum reductions of 3.9 and 3.6 log cycles were obtained for E. coli O157:H7 and S. Enteritidis, respectively. The maximum input energies required to inactivate E. coli O157:H7 and S. Enteritidis were 538 and 914 J, respectively. The higher kinetic value was obtained for S. Enteritidis (0.043 µs-1) representing the more heat–PEF sensitive bacteria compared to E. coli O157:H7.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food EngineeringSame topicMicrobial Inactivation MethodsFrench-language works237,207