Effect of Packaging Materials, Storage Methods, and Durations on the Functional Quality of the Red Hot Pepper (Capsicum annum L.) Powder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to investigate the effect of packaging material, storage methods, and duration on the functional properties of red pepper powder during a ten-month storage period. Samples were packed in Low-density, high-density, black low-density polyethylene, and aluminum pouches and kept at ambient and refrigerated conditions. A significant (p<0.001) interaction of effect of the three factors was observed for all parameters except for MC and PI. The percentage of TCC lost was 8.41%, 14.19%, 21.23%, and 30.68% in ALP, HDPE, LDPE, and BLDPE under refrigerated storage, and 10.91%, 17.65%, 25.01%, and 52.02%, respectively, in the same bags at ambient. The loss in Oleoresin content was 44.34%, 37.82%, 37.25%, and 20.77% at ambient, and 32.27%, 27.25%, 28.16%, and 13.42% under refrigeration in ALP, HDPE, BLDPE, and LDPE, respectively. The percentage of TAOC lost was 46.76%, 56.40%, 66.22%, and 61.52%, under refrigeration; and 57.29%, 67.45%, 68.50%, and 66.36%, respectively, at ambient storage, for ALP, HDPE, BLDPE, and LDPE. AlP maintained high qualities during the storage, due to the lower permeability of the AlP outer environment. Finally, further study on the safety and other nutritional qualities of the product is needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".