Acceptability, storage stability and costing of α‐amylase‐treated maize–beans–groundnuts–bambaranuts complementary blend
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effects of α‐amylase treatment on physical properties, acceptability to mothers, and cost of roasted and extruded maize–beans–groundnuts–bambaranuts complementary porridge recipes were assessed prior to their industrial production. Storage stability of the extruded α‐amylase‐treated fortified blend was assessed at 2 weeks and 6 months by sensory evaluation, peroxide value, water activity and microbiological load. The use of α‐amylase at 0.04% w/w enhanced porridge acceptability and resulted in 88% and 122% increase in flour concentration for roasted and extrusion‐cooked porridge flour, respectively, while maintaining porridge viscosity at 1000‐fold lower than that of traditionally used porridges. The extrusion cooked blend was stable for 6 months. α‐Amylase application increased the unit cost of the developed blend by only 1.4%. The total cost was less than US $ 2 kg−1, half the minimum price of commercially available complementary foods. Further work on marketing and the efficacy of this inexpensive food on growth of infants is warranted. Copyright © 2007 Society of Chemical Industry
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".