Quantification of biogenic amines and adaptation of an index as a quality indicator of rendered pig meals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to quantify biogenic amines and to adapt equations for the calculation of the biogenic amine index (BAI) in rendered pig carcass meals (RPCM). Samples of RPCM from three different origins were evaluated: Group 1—experimentally produced meal; Group 2—meal produced in a plant dedicated to rendering pigs dead on the farm due to non-infectious causes; and Group 3—meal produced in commercial rendering plants. Group 1 meals were produced from sow carcasses that were stored either under environmental temperature (ET = 25 °C) or refrigeration temperature (RT = −6 °C), and their biogenic amine contents were analyzed at 0, 24, 48, and 72 h of storage. The levels of the biogenic amines phenylethylamine, putrescine, cadaverine, histamine, tyramine, spermidine, and spermine of all meals were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography, and their BAIs were calculated. Group 1 meals stored at ET presented higher phenylethylamine, putrescine, cadaverine, and tyramine contents compared with those stored at RT after 24 h storage, whereas spermidine and spermine contents decreased after 24 h of storage at ET. The adapted BAI can be used as a quality indicator of RPCM.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".