MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974610177 · doi:10.1002/abio.200390005

Production of Fructose and Ethanol from Cane Molasses Using <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i> ATCC 36858

2003· article· en· W1974610177 on OpenAlexafffund
Hasan K. Atiyeh, Z. Duvnjak

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Biotechnologica · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicMicrobial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAgricultural Research ServiceLallemand
KeywordsRaffinoseFructoseSugarChemistryFood scienceFermentationEthanol fuelCaneEthanolSucroseEthanol fermentationGlycerolYeastBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this research was to study the possibility of the production of ethanol and enriched fructose syrups from sugar cane molasses using the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae ATCC 36858. In batch experiments with a total sugar concentration of between 96.7 g/l and 323.5 g/l, the fructose yield was above 90% of the theoretical value. The ethanol yield and volumetric productivity were in the range of 66% and 77% of the theoretical value, and between 0.53 g ethanol/l × h and 3.15 g ethanol/l × h, respectively. The fructose fraction in the carbohydrates content of the produced syrups was more than 95% when the total initial sugar concentration in the medium was below 273.8 g/l. Some oligosaccharides and glycerol were also produced in all tested media. The maximum amount of produced oligosaccharides including raffinose accounted for 13.4 g/l in the cane molasses medium with 323.5 g/l sugars in the initial phase of the fermentation process. The oligosaccharides produced and raffinose were completely consumed by the end of the fermentation process when the total initial sugar concentration was less than 191.3 g/l. The glycerol concentration was below 9.9 g/l. These findings are useful in the production of ethanol and high fructose syrups using sugar cane molasses.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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

Citations33
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa BiotechnologicaSame topicMicrobial Metabolites in Food BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207