Suitability of Pea Starch and Calcium Alginate as Antimicrobial Coatings on Chicken Skin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of incorporating trisodium phosphate (TSP) in pea starch (PS) and acidified sodium chlorite (ASC) in calcium alginate upon the antimicrobial activity of TSP and ASC was studied against a 3-strain cocktail of Salmonella inoculated on chicken skin. The influence of polymer coating concentration on skin pH, coating-skin adhesion, and coating absorption upon antimicrobial performance were investigated. Aqueous solutions of 0.5 to 4.8% (wt/vol) PS were prepared with 10% (wt/vol) TSP (PS + TSP coating), and alginate + ASC coatings contained 1% (wt/vol) calcium chloride in 1,200 ppm of ASC mixed with an aqueous solution of 0.5, 1.0, or 1.5% (wt/vol) sodium alginate. Coating drops (10 microL) were placed on chicken skin thighs, and the angle formed by the tangent of the liquid surface at the skin interface (contact angle) was measured using a digital camera to assess coating-skin adhesion. Excised skins were mounted in a ring holder, and 5 mL of the coatings was applied to the skin. Weight changes in the skins that were related to coating absorptiveness were recorded. The TSP dissolved in 3.5% PS and ASC in 1% alginate reduced Salmonella by 1.6 log cfu/g and 1.4 log cfu/g, respectively, within 24 h. These reductions were significantly greater than those caused by TSP or ASC alone in water for up to 120 h. In coatings, TSP and ASC caused significant elevation or reduction of skin surface pH for up to 120 h, respectively. The TSP destabilized PS with 88% of the coating having dripped from the skin 1 h later. Coatings with 0.5% PS were absorbed quickly by the skin and had high skin adhesion, whereas those with >3.5% PS had low skin adhesion and slow absorption. Alginate coatings with or without ASC were stable, and about 50% of the coating weight was retained at 120 h. The latter coatings appeared to have low absorptiveness because the skin gained approximately 1.0% of its weight within 60 min following application. These findings indicate that effects of the agents in coatings on skin pH, the extent of coating adhesion, and absorption may contribute to overall antimicrobial behaviors.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".