Genome‐scale metabolic modeling of a clostridial co‐culture for consolidated bioprocessing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An alternative consolidated bioprocessing approach is the use of a co-culture containing cellulolytic and solventogenic clostridia. It has been demonstrated that the rate of cellulose utilization in the co-culture of Clostridium acetobutylicum and Clostridium cellulolyticum is improved compared to the mono-culture of C. cellulolyticum, suggesting the presence of syntrophy between these two species. However, the metabolic interactions in the co-culture are not well understood. To understand the metabolic interactions in the co-culture, we developed a genome-scale metabolic model of C. cellulolyticum comprising of 431 genes, 621 reactions, and 603 metabolites. The C. cellulolyticum model can successfully predict the chemostat growth and byproduct secretion with cellulose as the substrate. However, a growth arrest phenomenon, which occurs in batch cultures of C. cellulolyticum at cellulose concentrations higher than 6.7 g/L, cannot be predicted by dynamic flux balance analysis due to the lack of understanding of the underlying mechanism. These genome-scale metabolic models of the pure cultures have also been integrated using a community modeling framework to develop a dynamic model of metabolic interactions in the co-culture. Co-culture simulations suggest that cellobiose inhibition cannot be the main factor that is responsible for improved cellulose utilization relative to mono-culture of C. cellulolyticum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".