English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Honey foam was prepared using particle (precipitated CaCO 3 ) or molecular (sodium lauryl sulfate) foaming agent. We noted the foam volume and the time it took a foam sample to collapse completely so as to determine the best foaming agent. Foams were prepared by aerating honey in the presence of varying concentrations of the particles or sodium lauryl sulfate. Aqueous foams were similarly prepared for comparison. Sodium lauryl sulfate gave a higher volume of honey foam, which did not collapse completely for more than 4 months compared with precipitated CaCO 3  particles which gave a smaller foam volume that collapsed completely within 4 weeks. Aqueous foams prepared from the surfactant, by contrast, collapsed completely within three hours while those prepared from the particles did not collapse within the same timeframe. This shows that the surfactant is a better foaming agent in honey compared with the particles, while the particles are a better foaming agent in water compared with the surfactant.

Foaming honey: particle or molecular foaming agent?