MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384932980 · doi:10.1111/ijfs.16601

Effect of cold plasma on lipid oxidation of fish and fish‐based products: a review

2023· review· en· W4384932980 on OpenAlexaff
Jing Wu, Chun Cui, Chunsheng Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Science & Technology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>Lipid oxidationFisheryFish productsChemistryFood scienceBiologyBiochemistryAntioxidant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Lipid oxidation is a major concern in preserving fish and its products, as it affects their quality, shelf life, and consumer acceptance. Cold plasma technology has emerged as a promising method for extending the shelf life of perishable products, including fish. However, the impact of cold plasma on lipid oxidation remains uncertain, as studies have reported conflicting findings. This review provides an up‐to‐date overview of the effects of cold plasma treatment on lipid oxidation in fish and fish‐based products, synthesising existing literature in the field. A comprehensive analysis of factors such as plasma generation techniques, treatment parameters, fish species, and lipid composition is conducted to elucidate the observed discrepancies in outcomes. In conclusion, current research suggests that moderate oxidation does not have adverse effects on overall sensory quality and may even enhance the flavour of fish. The degree of oxidation can be controlled through plasma parameters, thereby improving the quality of fish and fish 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Science & TechnologySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207