MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958527017 · doi:10.60692/0zkgw-kmy69

Encapsulation of Lactobacillus fermentum K73 by Refractance Window drying

2019· article· en· W6958527017 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMicroencapsulation and Drying Processes
Canadian institutionsCTT Group (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactobacillus fermentumMaltodextrinMicroorganismEncapsulation (networking)ProbioticKineticsLactobacillus acidophilus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this work was to model the survival of the microorganism and the kinetics of drying during the encapsulation of Lactobacillus fermentum K73 by Refractance Window drying. A whey culture medium with and without addition of maltodextrin were used as encapsulation matrices. The microorganism with the encapsulation matrices was dried at three water temperatures (333, 343 and 353 K) until reaching balanced moisture. Microorganism survival and thin layer drying kinetics were studied by using mathematical models. Results showed that modified Gompertz model and Midilli model described the survival of the microorganism and the drying kinetics, respectively. The most favorable process conditions found with the mathematical modelling were a drying time of 2460 s, at a temperature of 353 K. At these conditions, a product with 9.1 Log CFU/g and a final humidity of 10% [wet basis] using the culture medium as encapsulation matrix was obtained. The result shows that Refractance Window can be applied to encapsulate the microorganism probiotic with a proper survival of the microorganism.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.163 · 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