MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insight into how fermentation might contribute to the distinctiveness of Australian coffee

2024· article· en· W4405232295 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ruomeng Li, Cristián Varela, Damian Espinase Nandorfy, Anthony R. Borneman, Laura Hale, David W. Jeffery

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Chemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoffee research and impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of AdelaideAlberta Water Research Institute
KeywordsOptimal distinctiveness theoryFermentationFood scienceBiotechnologyChemistryBiologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a view to modulating the flavour profiles of Australian coffee, this investigation focused on three estates in New South Wales. Coffee cherries were processed into beans with wet fermented and non-fermented methods to evaluate the effects of fermentation and terroir on microbial population dynamics, volatile composition, and sensory properties. Thirty-three volatiles were quantified in green and roasted coffee beans – 12 esters, 9 alcohols, 6 acids, 3 monoterpenes, 2 norisoprenoids, 1 aldehyde – and 5 thiols were quantified in roasted coffee brews. Sensory descriptive analysis defined appearance, aroma, and flavour attributes to describe the coffee brews. Fermented coffees were characterised by increased intensity of ‘black tea leaves’ and ‘dark chocolate’ aromas and ‘burnt toast’ flavour. Results suggested that wet fermentation of Australian coffee cherries could enhance the content of some volatile compounds known to convey “floral” and “fruity” aromas commonly ascribed to premium coffees from traditional producing regions. • Uninoculated fermentation trialled on Australian coffee cherries from three estates. • Major volatiles determined for treatments and thiols in coffee brews were quantified. • Quantitative sensory profiling of coffee brews was undertaken with a trained panel. • Sensory profiles were linked with volatile compound data using PLS regression. • Microbial populations monitored during fermentation could contribute to variation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood ChemistrySame topicCoffee research and impactsFrench-language works237,207