MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954322844 · doi:10.1002/jsfa.9905

Effect of low‐temperature preservation on quality changes in Pacific white shrimp, <i>Litopenaeus vannamei</i>: a review

2019· review· en· W2954322844 on OpenAlexaff
Chuang Pan, Shengjun Chen, Hao Shuxian, Xianqing Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsLitopenaeusShrimpFood scienceLipid oxidationMelanosisShelf lifeFood preservationBiologyShellfishFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Aquatic animalAntioxidantBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shrimp has been widely accepted as an excellent resource for white meat due to its high-protein and low-fat content, especially low cholesterol. However, shrimps are highly perishable during preservation and retailing procedures due to the activities of enzymatic proteolysis, lipid oxidation, and microbial degradation. With increasing knowledge of and demands for safety, nutrition, and freshness of shrimp products, energy efficient, quality, maintained, and sustainable preservation technologies are needed. Low-temperature preservation, a practical processing method for improving the shelf life of food products, is widely used in the aquatic industry. This review focuses on the effects of low-temperature preservation on the quality changes in Litopenaeus vannamei. It considers physicochemical properties, sensory evaluation, melanosis assessment, and microbiological analysis. The perspectives of non-protein-based techniques on quality analysis of shrimps during preservation are also discussed. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations136
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Science of Food and AgricultureSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207