Investigation of <i>In Situ</i> and <i>Ex Situ</i> Mode of LAB Incorporation and the Effect on Dough Viscoelasticity, Bread Texture, and Overall Physical Quality Postbaking
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four lactic acid bacterium (LAB) strains, Lactococcus lactis subsp. diacetylactis, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, and Lactobacillus plantarum, were investigated regarding their protective efficiency on the dough and subsequent bread through in situ (by ways of a sourdough starter) or ex situ (by ways of LAB metabolites) incorporation. In the meantime, the effect of in situ and ex situ exopolysaccharide (EPS) supplementation was assessed by preparing a sourdough starter containing an EPS-producing strain and by external yeast β-glucan supplementation. The correlation analyses statistically confirmed that the enzyme expression and EPS production profile of the evaluated LAB strains served as an adequate predictor of their perspective dough and bread behavior. In situ application of L. rhamnosus and a coculture of L. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus and L. rhamnosus exerted the most desirable improvement on sourdough and bread quality, while L. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus and a combination of L. lactis subsp. diacetylactis and L. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus showed the best protecting ex situ efficiency. Additionally, EPS supplementation demonstrated viable and positive influences as well on dough and bread quality parameters. Our study contributes to understanding the quality-improving capabilities of LAB-based bioingredients and enhancing their efficiencies in bread applications.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it