Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 329

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 79 of the 79 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Alternative Drying Processes for the Industrial Preservation of Lactic Acid Starter Cultures

Open access
Santivarangkna, Chalat, Kulozik, Ulrich, Foerst, Petra·2007·Biotechnology Progress
DOI 10.1021/bp060268f
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The preservation of lactic acid starter cultures by alternative drying processes has attracted increasing attention due to the high costs and energy consumption of freezing and freeze drying. This review thus aims to provide a survey regarding the state of knowledge of starter culture production at high levels of viability. The results from numerous studies on various drying processes and lactic acid bacteria are summarized. The alternative drying processes considered, such as spray drying, fluidized bed drying, and vacuum drying, are mainly of industrial interest. The features, advantages, and disadvantages of these drying processes are described. In conclusion, the important factors that need to be considered, standardized, or optimized to achieve high levels of viability include intrinsic tolerance of cultures, growth media and conditions, stress induction, cell harvesting conditions, protective agents, rehydration conditions, enumeration of cells, and storage conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/bp060268f

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 329

Metadata

Authors
Santivarangkna, C., Kulozik, U., & Foerst, P.
Venue
Biotechnology Progress
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-01
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
302-315
ISSN
  • 1520-6033 (ISSN-L)
  • 8756-7938
DOI
10.1021/bp060268f
OpenAlex
W2051583472
Cited by
329
References
79
FWCI
11.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.