The Effects of Replacing Pork Fat with Cold-Pressed Coconut Oil on the Properties of Fresh Sausage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of substituting coconut oil on the chemical composition, microorganism, and sensory properties of fresh sausages were investigated. This experiment evaluated three (0, 10%, 20%) levels of cold-pressed coconut oil (CPCO) and pork fat stored at 3°C for 14 days. The following treatments: 1) control (20% pork fat: 0% CPCO), 2) 0% pork fat: 20% CPCO and 3) 10% pork fat: 10% CPCO were replicated three times. Treatments were analyzed for pH value, % moisture content, % drip loss, lipid stability (thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances TBARS), aerobic plate counts, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and sensory analysis. The initial moisture content of fresh sausage in this experiment ranged from 63.44 to 65.67%. Fresh sausage with 20% CPCO inhibited the growth of aerobic bacteria and obtained the highest TBARS values (4.25 mg MDA/kg) compared to the control treatment. In addition, fresh sausage (10% pork fat and 10% CPCO) decreased the % drip loss, pH value and obtained the highest overall rating (6.45) of sensory testing (n = 75). No E. coli and S. aureus were found in this study for 14 d at 3°C.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".