Investigation of gaseous ozone as an anti‐fungal fumigant for stored wheat
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, gaseous ozone was used as a fungicide to preserve stored wheat. The following operating parameters were investigated for their effects on the fungicidal efficacy of ozone: (1) the applied ozone dose; (2) ozonation time; (3) water activity of the wheat; and (4) temperature of the wheat. The effect of ozonation on germination of the wheat was also studied. Experimental results revealed that gaseous ozone was very effective in the inactivation of fungi associated with the wheat. Within 5 min of ozonation, 96.9% of the fungal spores were inactivated by applying 0.33 mg of ozone (g wheat) −1 min −1 . It was also found that increases in both water activity and temperature of the wheat enhanced the fungicidal efficacy of ozone. In addition, results of this study indicated that the inactivation processes could be controlled by simply monitoring the ozone exiting from the reactor and, consequently, the time‐consuming microbial examination processes could be avoided. This finding would make the application of ozone in the preservation of cereal grains easier, simpler, and more cost‐effective. It was also found that although the applied ozone doses above certain thresholds may reduce the germination of wheat, the inactivation of fungi could be achieved using applied ozone doses far below those thresholds. Copyright © 2006 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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 it