Physicochemical and Sensory Properties of Ginger Spiced Yoghurt
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
The physicochemical and sensory properties of ginger spiced yoghurt were investigated in the present study. Four yoghurt samples: A, B, C and D were prepared by addition of 0, 0.5, 1 and 1.5% (W/V) of ginger powder. Physicochemical properties of yoghurt samples determined at day 0 included pH, titratable acidity, dry matter, ash, fat and non-fat solid (NFS). The pH and titratable acidity were also evaluated during 30 days of storage at refrigerated conditions (4 – 6°C). The sensory attributes assessed were colour, odour, taste, texture and overall acceptability. From the results, ginger powder did not affect (P>0.05) the pH and titratable acidity of yoghurt but increased (P≤0.05) the dry matter, fat, NFS and ash content especially when spiced at 1% and 1.5% level. The spiced yoghurt did not show significant changes (P>0.05) in titratable acidity during storage as opposed to the unspiced yoghurt that increased (P<0.05) with storage time. The pH values of spiced yoghurt were not significantly affected (P>0.05) by storage contrary to the unspiced yoghurt. At the end of storage, the unspiced yoghurt presented the lowest (P≤0.05) pH and the highest (P≤0.05) titratable acidity. Results of sensory evaluation revealed the low appreciation of the spiced yoghurt with an increase in the proportion of ginger powder. However, yoghurt with 0.5% ginger powder was appreciated equally (P>0.05) with the unspiced sample. Spicing yoghurt with ginger powder therefore has positive effect on its physicochemical properties and shelf –life. The yoghurt spiced with 0.5% ginger powder could therefore be recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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