MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2692109585 · doi:10.1016/j.fawpar.2017.06.001

Curing conditions to inactivate Trichinella spiralis muscle larvae in ready-to-eat pork sausage

2017· article· en· W2692109585 on OpenAlexaff
Dolores E. Hill, John B. Luchansky, Anna C.S. Porto‐Fett, H. Ray Gamble, Valsin Fournet, Diane S. Hawkins-Cooper, Alvin A. Gajadhar, Rick Holley, Vijay K. Juneja, J. P. Dubey

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Waterborne Parasitology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Utilization and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCuring (chemistry)Trichinella spiralisFood scienceBrineTrichinellaChemistryLarvaBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Curing processes are one method by which pork products, which are considered ready to eat (RTE) and have not been otherwise tested or treated, can be rendered safe from risk for exposure to Trichinella muscle larvae (ML). Curing processes in the U.S. currently require individual validation of methods to demonstrate inactivation of Trichinella . This is a major undertaking for each process; currently no model of meat chemistry exists that can be correlated with inactivation of Trichinella . Given the potential for new RTE products (e.g., lower salt), the availability of a wider range of tested methods for inactivation of Trichinella in pork would be of substantial value to the industry. In this study, five variables were tested – salt/brine concentration, water activity (a w ), pH, temperature, and time, using low and high endpoints for common curing treatments for dry cured pork sausage. The data demonstrated that NaCl concentrations above 1.3%, in combination with fermentation to pH 5.2 or below, resulted in inactivation of > 96% of Trichinella ML in stuffed sausages within 24–28 h. All ML were inactivated by 7–10 days post-stuffing. These curing processes reliably predict inactivation of Trichinella spiralis , and can be used within the defined upper and lower endpoint parameters to reduce or eliminate the need for individual product validation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Waterborne ParasitologySame topicInsect Utilization and EffectsFrench-language works237,207