Encapsulation of Lactobacillus fermentum K73 by Refractance Window drying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this work was to model the survival of the microorganism and the kinetics of drying during the encapsulation of Lactobacillus fermentum K73 by Refractance Window drying. A whey culture medium with and without addition of maltodextrin were used as encapsulation matrices. The microorganism with the encapsulation matrices was dried at three water temperatures (333, 343 and 353 K) until reaching balanced moisture. Microorganism survival and thin layer drying kinetics were studied by using mathematical models. Results showed that modified Gompertz model and Midilli model described the survival of the microorganism and the drying kinetics, respectively. The most favorable process conditions found with the mathematical modelling were a drying time of 2460 s, at a temperature of 353 K. At these conditions, a product with 9.1 Log CFU/g and a final humidity of 10% [wet basis] using the culture medium as encapsulation matrix was obtained. The result shows that Refractance Window can be applied to encapsulate the microorganism probiotic with a proper survival of the microorganism.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".