MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601860521 · doi:10.1002/elsc.201100102

Improved xylanase production using apple pomace waste by <i><scp>A</scp>spergillus niger</i> in koji fermentation

2012· article· en· W1601860521 on OpenAlexaff
Gurpreet Singh Dhillon, Surinder Kaur, Satinder Kaur Brar, Fatma Gassara, Mausam Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering in Life Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsInstitut de Recherche et de Développement en AgroenvironnementInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPomaceXylanaseFermentationFood scienceProduction (economics)Aspergillus nigerChemistryPulp and paper industryBiotechnologyBiologyBiochemistryEngineeringEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Xylanase production by Aspergillus niger NRRL‐567 in solid‐state fermentation (koji fermentation) was optimized using 24 factorial design and response surface methodology. The evaluated variables were the initial moisture level and concentration of inducers [veratryl alcohol (VA), copper sulphate (CS), and lactose (LAC)], leading to the response of xylanase production. Initial moisture level and LAC were found to be the most significant variable for xylanase production (p<0.05). The highest xylanase production was observed with 3578.8 ± 65.3 IU/gds (gram dry substrate) under optimal conditions using initial moisture of 85% (v/w), pH 5.0 and inducers VA (2 mM/kg), LAC 2% (w/w), and CS (1.5 mM/kg) after 48 h of incubation time. Higher xylanase activity of 3952 ± 78.3 IU/gds was attained during scale‐up of the process in solid‐state tray fermentation under optimum conditions after 72 h of incubation time. The present study demonstrates that A. niger NRRL‐567 can efficiently be used to achieve xylanase production with an economical and environmental benefit in solid‐state tray fermentation. The developed process can be used to develop an effective process for commercially feasible bioproduction of xylanases for speciality applications, such as conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to biofuels and other value‐added products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering in Life SciencesSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207