Optimizing the medium components in bioemulsifiers production by<i>Candida lipolytica</i>with response surface method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A response surface methodology was used to study bioemulsifier production by Candida lipolytica. A 2(4) full experimental design was previously carried out to investigate the effects and interactions of the concentrations of corn oil, urea, ammonium sulfate, and potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate on the emulsification activity (EA) of the bioemulsifier produced by C. lipolytica. The best EA value (3.727 units of emulsification activity (UEA)) was obtained with a medium composed of 0.4 g of urea, 1.1 g of ammonium sulfate, 2.04 g of potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate, 5 mL of corn oil, 50 mL of distilled water, and 50 mL of seawater. A curvature check was performed and revealed a lack of fit of the linear approximation. The proximity of the optimum point was evident, as was the need for quadratic model and second-order designs that incorporate the effect of the curvature. Medium constituents were then optimized for the EA using a three-factor central composite design and response surface methodology. The second-order model showed statistical significance and predictive ability. It was found that the maximum EA produced was 4.415 UEA, and the optimum levels of urea, ammonium sulfate, and potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate were, respectively, 0.544% (m/v), 2.131% (m/v), and 2.628% (m/v).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".