Green alternative for sodium metabisulfite substitution: Comparison of bacterial and fungal proteases effect in hard biscuit making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sodium metabisulfite is one of the most employed reducing agents in hard biscuit making. The recent results about its adverse effects on human health have pushed us to look in new safer and greener directions. Two different proteases, from distinct strains (bacterial and fungal), were selected and their effects on the dough thermomechanical performances, texture, and structure of the hard biscuits were compared with those obtained from the sodium metabisulfite. Doughs treated with fungal protease showed higher stability during mixing and higher consistency throughout the heating stage. On the other hand, bacterial protease had the greatest weakening effect on protein with a marked reduction of starch gelatinization. Doughs processed with fungal enzymes reached similar values to those containing sodium metabisulfite. In terms of hardness, no significant ( p < 0.05) differences were found between biscuits made with bacterial protease and sodium metabisulfite. Analysis of the volumetric characteristics highlighted that bacterial enzymes gave higher values of specific volume and surface area. Regarding the structure of the hard biscuits, sodium metabisulfite produced a more uniform structure with fewer and smaller pockets as compared with the samples treated with proteases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".