Brazilian kefir: structure, microbial communities and chemical composition

Microbial ecology and chemical composition of Brazilian kefir beverage was performed. The microorganisms associated with Brazilian kefir were investigated using a combination of phenotypic and genotypic methods. A total of 359 microbial isolates were identified. Lactic acid bacteria (60.5%) were the major isolated group identified, followed by yeasts (30.6%) and acetic acid bacteria (8.9%). Lactobacillus paracasei (89 isolates), Lactobacillus parabuchneri (41 isolates), Lactobacillus casei (32 isolates), Lactobacillus kefiri (31 isolates), Lactococcus lactis (24 isolates), Acetobacter lovaniensis (32 isolates), Kluyveromyces lactis (31 isolates), Kazachstania aerobia (23 isolates), Saccharomyces cerevisiae (41 isolates) and Lachancea meyersii (15 isolates) were the microbial species isolated. Scanning electron microscopy showed that the microbiota was dominated by bacilli (short and curved long) cells growing in close association with lemon-shaped yeasts cells. During the 24 h of fermentation, the protein content increased, while lactose and fat content decreased. The concentration of lactic acid ranged from 1.4 to 17.4 mg/ml, and that of acetic acid increased from 2.1 to 2.73 mg/ml. The production of ethanol was limited, reaching a final mean value of 0.5 mg/ml.The authors acknowledge Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES) for scholarshipsand and CAARG - Cooperativa Agricola Alto Rio Grande Ltda. (Lavras/MG, Brazil) for the milk supply

Comparative study of the biochemical changes and volatile compound formations during the production of novel whey-based kefir beverages and traditional milk kefir

Cheese whey (CW) and deproteinised cheese whey (DCW) were investigated for their suitability as novel substrates for the production of kefir-like beverages. Lactose consumption, ethanol production, as well as organic acids and volatile compounds formation, were determined during CW and DCW fermentation by kefir grains and compared with values obtained during the production of traditional milk kefir. The results showed that kefir grains were able to utilise lactose from CW and DCW and produce similar amounts of ethanol (7.8–8.3 g/l), lactic acid (5.0 g/l) and acetic acid (0.7 g/l) to those obtained during milk fermentation. In addition, the concentration of higher alcohols (2-methyl-1-butanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 1-hexanol, 2-methyl-1-propanol, and 1-propanol), ester (ethyl acetate) and aldehyde (acetaldehyde) in cheese whey-based kefir and milk kefir beverages were also produced in similar amounts. Cheese whey and deproteinised cheese whey may therefore serve as substrates for the production of kefir-like beverages similar to milk kefir.The authors acknowledge the financial support from Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES), CAPES-GRICES and Lactogal for supplying cheese whey powder

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

A História da Alimentação: balizas historiográficas

Os M. pretenderam traçar um quadro da História da Alimentação, não como um novo ramo epistemológico da disciplina, mas como um campo em desenvolvimento de práticas e atividades especializadas, incluindo pesquisa, formação, publicações, associações, encontros acadêmicos, etc. Um breve relato das condições em que tal campo se assentou faz-se preceder de um panorama dos estudos de alimentação e temas correia tos, em geral, segundo cinco abardagens Ia biológica, a econômica, a social, a cultural e a filosófica!, assim como da identificação das contribuições mais relevantes da Antropologia, Arqueologia, Sociologia e Geografia. A fim de comentar a multiforme e volumosa bibliografia histórica, foi ela organizada segundo critérios morfológicos. A seguir, alguns tópicos importantes mereceram tratamento à parte: a fome, o alimento e o domínio religioso, as descobertas européias e a difusão mundial de alimentos, gosto e gastronomia. O artigo se encerra com um rápido balanço crítico da historiografia brasileira sobre o tema

Comparative study of the biochemical changes and volatile compound formations during the production of novel whey-based kefir beverages and traditional milk kefir

a b s t r a c t Cheese whey (CW) and deproteinised cheese whey (DCW) were investigated for their suitability as novel substrates for the production of kefir-like beverages. Lactose consumption, ethanol production, as well as organic acids and volatile compounds formation, were determined during CW and DCW fermentation by kefir grains and compared with values obtained during the production of traditional milk kefir. The results showed that kefir grains were able to utilise lactose from CW and DCW and produce similar amounts of ethanol (7.8-8.3 g/l), lactic acid (5.0 g/l) and acetic acid (0.7 g/l) to those obtained during milk fermentation. In addition, the concentration of higher alcohols (2-methyl-1-butanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 1-hexanol, 2-methyl-1-propanol, and 1-propanol), ester (ethyl acetate) and aldehyde (acetaldehyde) in cheese whey-based kefir and milk kefir beverages were also produced in similar amounts. Cheese whey and deproteinised cheese whey may therefore serve as substrates for the production of kefir-like beverages similar to milk kefir