The Effect of Buffalo Meat on Composition, Instrumental and Sensory Characteristics of Traditional Greek Sausages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five (5) mixtures of buffalo / pork meat (70/0, 52.5/17.5, 35/35, 17.5/52.5 and 0/70), maintaining stable the amount of pork backfat, were prepared and analyzed for their chemical composition, fatty acids profile, instrumental parameters and sensory attributes. The results of the study showed that the addition of buffalo meat produced sausages with higher protein and less fat content. A slight decrease in ?6/?3 ratio was observed and an increase in CLA fatty acids. Principal Component Analysis revealed that the lower fat content in the sausages the higher the levels of CLA18:10trans 12cis and CLA18:9cis 11trans, whereas, SFA is abundant at the highest fat levels. Redness and hardness instrumentally increased in the sausages with the addition of buffalo meat, while juiciness decreased, probably due to the decreased lipid content. The mixture with the ratio of 52.5/17.5 buffalo/pork positively maximized sensorial consistency, elasticity and cohesiveness of the traditional sausages, while the addition of 70.0/0.0 mixture, hardness and redness.
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) | 0.001 | 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".