MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inactivation of <i>Escherichia coli</i> O157:H7 and <i>Salmonella enteritidis</i> in Liquid Egg White Using Pulsed Electric Field

2006· article· en· W2104374690 on OpenAlexaff
Malek Amiali, Michael Ngadi, James P. Smith, Vijaya G.S. Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmonella enteritidisEscherichia coliElectric fieldPathogenSalmonellaEnterobacteriaceaeMicrobiologyInoculationFoodborne pathogenFood scienceBiologyChemistryBacteriaBiochemistryPhysicsListeria monocytogenes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The effects of temperature and pulsed electric field (PEF) intensity on inactivation of pathogens such as Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in egg white was investigated. Liquid egg white inoculated with 10 8 colony‐forming units (CFU)/mL of each pathogen was treated with up to 60 pulses (each of 2 JAS width) at electric field intensities of 20 and 30 kV/cm. The processing temperatures were 10°C, 20°C, and 30°C. After treatment, uninjured and total viable cells were enumerated in selective and nonselective agars, respectively. Maximum inactivations of 3.7 and 2.9 log units were obtained for S. enteritidis and E. coli O157:H7, respectively, while injured cells accounted for 0.5 and 0.9 logs for E. coli O157:H7 and S. enteritidis , respectively. For both bacteria, increasing treatment temperature tended to increase the inactivation rate. There was synergy between electric field intensity and processing temperature. The inactivation rate constant k T values for E. coli O157:H7 on both selective and nonselective agars were 8.2 × 10 ‐3 and 6.6 × 10 ‐3 /μS, whereas the values for S. enteritidis were 16.2 × 10 ‐3 and 12.6 × 10 ‐3 /μS, respectively. The results suggest that E. coli O157:H7 was more resistant to heat‐PEF treatment compared with S. enteritidis.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations62
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food ScienceSame topicMicrobial Inactivation MethodsFrench-language works237,207