Gliadin Degradation Ability of Artisanal Lactic Acid Bacteria, The Potential Probiotics from Dairy Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selected Lactobacillus spp. with high protease and acid producing capacity was explored for effective gliadin degradation in wheat sourdough environment. The total titratable acidity (TTA), pH and lactic acid bacteria (LAB) counts were evaluated. At the end of fermentation, the acidity and pH of the sourdough samples reached to 13.49-17.34 and 3.84-3.52 range, respectively. LAB population was enumerated as 107-109 colony forming unit (CFU)/g dough. Gliadin profiles were examined qualitatively using sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) and reverse phase-high performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC) techniques. Especially RP-HPLC could be considered as a sensitive technique and is useful to determine the biochemical changes in gliadin fragmentation throughout sourdough fermentation process. LAB inoculated sourdoughs and chemically acidified sourdoughs generally represent similar gliadin degradation patterns. Although the total removal of gliadin toxicity could not be achieved in all dough formulations, it may be beneficial to use LAB to improve the dough and bread quality through the exploration of its bioconversion by-products.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".