MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200489502 · doi:10.1007/s13197-021-05327-7

In vitro assessment of histamine and lactate production by a multi-strain synbiotic

2021· article· en· W4200489502 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Science and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIn vitroHistamineStrain (injury)Food scienceMicrobiologyChemistryBiologyBiochemistryMedicineInternal medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent studies suggest histamine and d -lactate may negatively impact host health. As excess histamine is deleterious to the host, the identification of bacterial producers has contributed to concerns over the consumption of probiotics or live microorganisms in fermented food items. Some probiotic products have been suspected of inducing d -lactic-acidosis; an illness associated with neurocognitive symptoms such as ataxia. The goals of the present study were to test the in vitro production of histamine and d -lactate by a 24-strain daily synbiotic and to outline methods that others can use to test for their production. Using enzymatic based assays, no significant production of histamine was observed compared to controls ( P > 0.05), while d -lactate production was comparable to a commercially available probiotic with no associated health risk. These assays provide a means to add to the safety profile of synbiotic and probiotic products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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