Effects of storage under a modified atmosphere on the microbiological and organoleptic qualities of ground beef prepared from pasteurized manufacturing beef
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A 40-kg lot of manufacturing beef, i.e. meat used for the production of ground beef products, was collected at a beef packing plant. The lot was divided into two batches. One batch was pasteurized by immersion in water at 85 °C for 60 s, the other batch was not pasteurized. Both batches were then ground. The ground meat was packed in overwrapped trays, which were master packaged under a modified atmosphere of 70% O2 : 30% CO2. The master packs were stored at 2 °C for up to 12 days. At the time of pack preparation and at 2-day intervals, a master pack containing pasteurized and another pack containing unpasteurized meat, were opened and retail packs from each master pack were displayed at 4 °C for 3 days. Samples for microbiological analysis were obtained at the times of opening master packs and at the end of display. Displayed meat was assessed daily for colour, discoloration and retail appearance, and for odour intensity and acceptability at the end of display. After either a period of storage or a period of storage and display, the numbers of bacteria recovered from pasteurized meat were less than the numbers recovered from unpasteurized meat. The colour of pasteurized meat was perceived as being paler than that of unpasteurized meat, but discoloration was similar or less, and retail appearance was similar or better for pasteurized than unpasteurized meat at all times. The odours of displayed, pasteurized meat were generally somewhat less intense and more acceptable than those of unpasteurized meat. The findings indicate that pasteurization of manufacturing beef to improve the microbiological safety of ground beef provides a product of acceptable appearance and enhanced stability during storage under a modified atmosphere and subsequent display in air.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".