Evaluation of Sensory Properties of Probiotic Yogurt Containing Food Products with Prebiotic Fibresin Mwanza, Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Yogurt becomes a functional food upon incorporating probiotics-live microorganisms which when adequately administered confer health benefits. Prebiotics are fermentable fibres that nourish beneficial gastrointestinal microflora enhance the functionality of probiotics. This research aimed to improve the acceptability and functionality of probiotic yogurt produced in Mwanza, Tanzania by incorporating probiotic food ingredients. The probiotic culture Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and standard yogurt cultures Lactobacillus delbrueckii bulgaricus and Steptococcus thermophilus were used to manufacture yogurt, then locally available prebiotic food ingredients containing fructooligosaccha- ride/inulin were incorporated. A nine-point facial hedonic scale was used to evaluate five yogurt samples. A mean score between one and three indicated that the sample product was well accepted. Probiotic yogurt containing onions, garlic and sweet potato received a score of 1.6 ± 0.84 (p 0.90), and plantains, 5.3 ± 2.56 (p > 0.90) were not well accepted. Sweet, mildly flavored prebiotic ingredients were most successfully incorpo- rated into probiotic yogurt in Mwanza.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".