MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052464912 · doi:10.1007/bf03175543

Microbiological and chemical characterisations of organic and conventional date pastes (Phoenix dactylifera L.) from Tunisia

2008· article· en· W2052464912 on OpenAlexaff
Abdessalem Mrabet, Mokhtar Rejili, Belgacem Lachiheb, P.M.A. Toivonen, Nizar Chaira, Ali Ferchichi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Microbiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDate Palm Research Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhoenix dactyliferaFood sciencePasteurizationSugarMoistureWater contentCultivarChemistryPalm oilWater activityHorticultureBotanyPalmBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical and microbiological properties of organic and conventional date pastes produced from the Deglet Nour cultivar were investigated. Significant differences were observed in water content, sugar profiles, and pH among the date pastes. The low moisture and the high acidity of organic date paste were two important positive attributes for its storage and potential manufacturing uses. Before pasteurisation, moulds CFU’s of the organic paste was significantly ( P < 0.01 ) lower than those of the conventional one but no significant differences were observed for yeasts, coliforms and the total aerobic flora among the two date pastes. Considerable interest has developed on the preservation of conventional date paste by the use of natural additives such as Juniperus phoenicea and olive oil (conditioned paste). At a given mixture of Juniperus and olive oil and after pasteurisation, mould CFU’s were reduced by 95% ( P < 0.01 ) whereas the reduction was only 84% for the yeast populations, after 45 days at 25 °C.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of MicrobiologySame topicDate Palm Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207