MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SURVIVAL OF THREE <i>SALMONELLA</i> SEROTYPES ON BEEF TRIMMINGS DURING SIMULATED COMMERCIAL FREEZING AND FROZEN STORAGE

2001· article· en· W2090643852 on OpenAlexaff
Gary A. Dykes, S.M. Moorhead

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Safety · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicListeria monocytogenes in Food Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmonellaAgarFood scienceSerotypeChemistryInoculationTryptic soy brothMicrobiologyBiologyBacteriaHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study investigated the survival of three Salmonella serotypes (S. Brandenberg, S. Dublin and S. Typhimurium) on beef trimmings during simulated commercial freezing, frozen storage for 9 months and subsequent abusive slow thawing and refreezing conditions. This was achieved by plating samples monthly and after thawing and refreezing on nonselective Tryptic Soy Agar (TSA) and selective Xylose Lysine Desoxycholate Agar (XLD) and incubating both at 37C for 24 h to determine Salmonella counts, aerobic counts and the presence, if any, of sublethal injury of this pathogen. Two freezing temperatures (−18C or −35C) to simulate slow or rapid freezing respectively, and two inoculation levels (103 cfu g−1 or 105 cfu g−1) were used. Aerobic counts and counts of all the Salmonella serotypes did not change significantly (p > 0.05) during frozen storage or for any of the other treatments applied in this study. This finding was attributed to the insulating nature of the subcutaneous fat layer in this manufacturing cut. These results are important with respect to food safety associated with ground beef processing.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food SafetySame topicListeria monocytogenes in Food SafetyFrench-language works237,207