A Comparative Study on the Physicochemical Parameters of Camel and Buffalo Milk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research work was carried out to compare the various physicochemical parameters of two species, camel and buffalo. Camel milk samples were collected at National Research Centre on Camel, Bikaner and buffaloes milk samples were collected from the surroundings villages of Bikaner. After collection milk samples were brought to the laboratory of NRCC Bikaner and they were analyzed for fat, SNF (Solid Not Fat), protein, lactose, total ash and pH using milk analyzer (Lactoscan). Camel milk had 2.71±0.11 fat, 6.91±0.03 SNF, 2.23±0.02 protein, 3.86±0.02 lactose, 0.79±0.004 total ash and 6.95±0.01 pH while buffalo milk had 8.71±0.82 fat, 8.44±0.19 SNF, 4.11±0.02 protein, 4.46±0.15 lactose, 0.98±0.05 total ash and 7.59±0.02 pH. Fat, SNF, protein and pH of buffalo milk was significantly (P<0.001) higher than camel milk. Lactose and total ash in buffalo milk was also higher than camel milk but at P<0.05 level. So it can be concluded that all the studied parameters were high in buffalo milk than camel milk
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".