MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224998233 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1574203/v1

Pulsed Electric Field Effect Pretreatment on the Behavior of Microwave-assisted Pomegranate Arils (Punica granatum L.) Hot air Drying

2022· preprint· en· W4224998233 on OpenAlexafffund
Malek Amiali, Samia BRIKI, Besma BECHAA, Bariza Zitouni, G. S. V. Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsArilElectric fieldPunicaChemistryFood scienceMaterials scienceHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pulsed electric field treatment is a new, non-thermal pretreatment method that preserves foods forexcellent sensory, nutritional and long-life quality. In this study, the impact of pulsed electric field pretreatment on drying kinetics and the quality of dried pomegranate arils was evaluated. The pomegranate arils samples were subjected to pulsed electric field treatment at different intensities of the electric field of 0.5, 1 and 1.5 kV/cm with application of exponentialpulses of 700 µsduration followed by Microwave-assisted Hot air drying. the samplesweredried at 50, 60 and 70°C with a drying times varying from 65 to 190 minutes, while, for untreated arils, the drying time was varying from 90 to 250 minutes. The highest water diffusion coefficient of 8.25 × 10− 8 m2/s was calculated for samples subjected to electric field intensity of 1.5 kV/cm and 70°C treatment temperature. The greatest Hardness was 39.35 ± 4.81 N. The pulsed electric field arils treatments resulted in better electroporation ofthe tissues. The Pulsed electric field -treated dried arils had higher red (a*) and yellow (b*) and (L*) values compare to untreated dried arils.These dried arils are characterized by a high content of total polyphenols 3350.28 mg GAE/kg DM and high antioxidant capacity (0.6 mg eqTrolox g− 1).The drying kinetics were modeled by different models. The models that best fit the drying data was Midilli et al., followed by Logarithmic and modified logistic model.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicMicrobial Inactivation MethodsFrench-language works237,207