MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032341542 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23817

Lactic fermentation of cooked navy beans by <i>Lactobacillus paracasei</i><scp>CBA L74</scp> aimed at a potential production of functional legume‐based foods

2020· article· en· W3032341542 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rosa Colucci Cante, Marianna Gallo, Federica Nigro, Francesca Passannanti, Dana Salameh, Andrea Budelli, Roberto Nigro

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactobacillus paracaseiFermentationFood scienceLegumeProbioticLactobacillusLactic acidStarterLactic acid fermentationMicroorganismBiologyBacteriaChemistryBiotechnologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, scientific interest in the development of non‐dairy‐based functional foods is increasing progressively and the fermentation of cereals, legumes, fruits and vegetable‐based foods is becoming an important scientific research topic for the production of new probiotic products. In particular, legumes represent a possible alternative to protein foods from animal origins and an adequate fermentation substrate as they contain high amount of nutrients, such as proteins, carbohydrates, fibres, vitamins, and minerals, which are all useful to the growth and metabolic activity of certain microorganisms. This work focuses on the feasibility of developing a dry legume‐based functional product using a fermentation process carried out on a 10% w/v navy bean suspension, in a lab‐scale stirred batch reactor. After soaking and cooking dried navy beans, the fermentation tests performed on the resulting medium using Lactobacillus paracasei CBA L74 showed a maximum bacterial count of 109 CFU/mL after 20 hours and a maximum lactic acid concentration of 1.9 g/L after 16 hours of process time. A freeze‐drying process was performed on the fermented bean suspension, showing a 2‐log microbial reduction and a bacterial viability in the resulting probiotic powder of 3.7 × 108 CFU/g.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207