MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of whey protein on syneresis of raw milk curds

2003· article· en· W2128250326 on OpenAlexafffund
P. Piyasena, J. R. Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProteins in Food Systems
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSyneresisFood scienceWhey proteinRaw milkRaw materialChemistryMilk protein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The influence of whey protein dispersions (WPDs) on syneresis of renneted curd was studied. Homogenized and non-homogenized WPDs containing 1.353% protein were added to raw milk to give a final concentration of 20.64%. The amount of whey released and the amount of protein and fat retained in the curd was determined at low (6.26) and high (6.5) pH. Adding WPDs to raw milk increased the amount of whey released at pH 6.5; however, no differences were observed at pH 6.26. Homogenization of WPDs tended to reduce whey yield at high pH but tended to increase it at low pH. More whey was released at low pH (34.3–34.4 g) compared to high pH (30.6–32.4 g). The amount of protein lost in whey was greater at low pH (0.298 vs. 0.268 g). Curd produced from milk with added WPDs contained less protein and less fat than that produced from raw milk. These findings reveal the importance of substrate pH in combination with homogenization of added protein dispersions from whey when utilized by cheese producers to optimize cheese yield and composition.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicProteins in Food SystemsFrench-language works237,207