MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736051956 · doi:10.1111/jtxs.12283

Quality attributes of bread fortified with staghorn sumac extract

2017· article· en· W2736051956 on OpenAlexaff
Sunan Wang, Fan Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Texture Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMedicinal Plant Research
Canadian institutionsNiagara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood scienceIngredientPreservativeFlavorAnacardiumAromaPolyphenolChemistryShelf lifeDried fruitTraditional medicineBiologyHorticultureMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina) is rich in polyphenols and may be used as an innovative ingredient in maintaining and enhancing food quality. In this report, aqueous extracts of sumac fruit powder were added up to 10% in wheat bread formulation. The extract concentration-dependently delayed the mold growth (up to 5 log reduction in 7-day storage) and the staling of bread. Adding sumac extracts dose-dependently increased the total phenolic and anthocyanin contents of the breads. Minimal changes were observed in loaf volume, water activity, moisture content, texture (cohesiveness, springiness, and adhesive), and aroma of breads containing extracts of less than 4%. Overall, sumac addition altered several quality attributes of bread, including hardness, color, and sensory acceptance in appearance, flavor, and texture. Sumac holds potential as a natural preservative and an antistaling agent in bread formulation. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The rising healthy food market demands bakery products fortified with novel functional ingredients. Staghorn sumac is an emerging healthy food ingredient that has attracted much research attention recently. This study provides a scientific basis to develop bread fortified with sumac-derived functional ingredients. The results pointed out the feasibility of making sumac-fortified breads with enhanced phenolic content, increased shelf life, and acceptable sensory profile.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.197
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Texture StudiesSame topicMedicinal Plant ResearchFrench-language works237,207