Quality Evaluation of Flaxseed for Food Use Specifications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Northern Great Plains regional survey of microbiological loads in flaxseed was completed for years 2008 and 2009. Effects of cleaning flaxseed on microbial loads including aerobic plate counts (APCs), mold counts (MCs) yeast counts (YCs), coliform counts (CCs), Escherichia coli counts, and Enterobacteriaceae counts (ECs) were determined. Chemical analyses including oil and linolenic acid -ALA indicated that all flaxseed had near normal oil content. This was the first reported survey for flaxseed. The pre-cleaned flaxseed had an average of 5.7 ± 0.1, 4.1 ± 0.2, 4.5 ± 0.2, 3.6 ± 0.1, and 3.0 ± 0.1 log colony forming units (CFU) g-1 of APC, CC, EC, YC and MC respectively. All counts were higher than those for cleaned seed. No E. coli was detected. The North Dakota-West (ND-W) region flaxseed had higher MC when compared to Canada, ND-North East (ND-NE) and ND-South East (ND-SE) region flaxseed. For APC, the counts were higher in flaxseed from Canada when compared to North Dakota. Cleaning the flaxseed should be considered an important step in reducing the microbial counts and also for maintaining high quality flaxseed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".