Influence of processing parameters on permeate flow and retention of aroma and phenolic compounds in chokeberry juice concentrated by reverse osmosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reverse osmosis (RO) concentration of chokeberry juice, a rich source of polyphenols, at three different pressures (45, 50 and 55 bar) and two temperature regimes (with cooling and without cooling of the retentate) was studied. Concentration was carried out on a laboratory membrane unit with plates and frames on composite Alfa Laval membranes RO98pHt. Juice was concentrated till 24.9% of total soluble solids content (TSSC) . The permeate flow highly depended on processing parameters and varied from 15.19 ± 3.22 L/m2h at the beginning to 8.00 ± 2.21 L/m2h at the end of processes. Total phenolic compounds (4 anthocyanins, 2 flavonols and 2 phenolic acids) were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Twenty four volatile compounds were identified by gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in chokeberry juice and concentrates. Processes at 50 and 55 bar with cooling proved to be the best in terms of chokeberry aroma, antioxidant activity and total phenolic compounds retention.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".