Lactobacillus salivarius Fermentation Reduced Glucosinolate and Fibre in Canola Meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Local traditional fermented foods consisting of seven samples of <em>tempoyak</em> (made from fresh durian fruit), six samples of <em>budu</em> (made from boiled fish), four samples of <em>tempeh</em> (made from boiled soybean), two samples of vegetable pickle (made from raw cabbage) and one sample of <em>tapai</em> (made from cooked glutinous rice), were used as samples for the isolation of lactic acid bacteria (LAB). A number of samples for different fermented foods like <em>tempoyak</em>,<em> budu</em> and vegetable pickle were screened as they were fermented by microorganisms naturally present in the food. One hundred isolates were obtained and by sequential screening for catalase activity and Gram-staining, 20 isolates were determined to be <em>Lactobacillus</em>. Ten isolates with the highest enzymatic activities were selected based on the biochemical reactions of the API ZYM kit. Canola meal (CM) was treated with the ten <em>Lactobacillus </em>isolates in solid state fermentation for 30 days. The most efficient LAB isolate was identified as <em>lactobacillus</em> <em>salivarius</em> and significantly reduced the total glucosinolate and crude fibre content of CM by 38% and 16%, respectively.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 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".