MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1959247255 · doi:10.1039/c5lc00527b

Microalgae on display: a microfluidic pixel-based irradiance assay for photosynthetic growth

2015· article· en· W1959247255 on OpenAlexafffund
Percival J. Graham, Jason Riordon, David Sinton

Bibliographic record

VenueLab on a Chip · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsIrradiancePhotobioreactorLaboratory flaskMicrofluidicsBiological systemLight intensityIntensity (physics)Environmental scienceOpticsMaterials scienceChemistryNanotechnologyBiologyBiofuelBiotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microalgal biofuel is an emerging sustainable energy resource. Photosynthetic growth is heavily dependent on irradiance, therefore photobioreactor design optimization requires comprehensive screening of irradiance variables, such as intensity, time variance and spectral composition. Here we present a microfluidic irradiance assay which leverages liquid crystal display technology to provide multiplexed screening of irradiance conditions on growth. An array of 238 microreactors are operated in parallel with identical chemical environments. The approach is demonstrated by performing three irradiance assays. The first assay evaluates the effect of intensity on growth, quantifying saturating intensity. The second assay quantifies the influence of time-varied intensity and the threshold frequency for growth. Lastly, the coupled influence of red-blue spectral composition and intensity is assessed. Each multiplexed assay is completed within three days. In contrast, completing the same number of experiments using conventional incubation flasks would require several years. Not only does our approach enable more rapid screening, but the short optical path avoids self-shading issues inherent to flask based systems.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLab on a ChipSame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207