Cassava wastewater as a substrate for the simultaneous production of rhamnolipids and polyhydroxyalkanoates by Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glycerol, cassava wastewater (CW), waste cooking oil and CW with waste frying oils were evaluated as alternative low-cost carbon substrates for the production of rhamnolipids and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) by various Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains. The polymers and surfactants produced were characterized by gas chromatography-mass spectrophotometry (MS) and by high-performance liquid chromatography-MS, and their composition was found to vary with the carbon source and the strain used in the fermentation. The best overall production of rhamnolipids and PHAs was obtained with CW with frying oil as the carbon source, with PHA production corresponding to 39% of the cell dry weight and rhamnolipid production being 660 mg l(-1). Under these conditions, the surface tension of the culture decreased to 30 mN m(-1), and the critical micelle concentration was 26.5 mg l(-1). It would appear that CW with frying oil has the highest potential as an alternative substrate, and its use may contribute to a reduction in the overall environmental impact generated by discarding such residues.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".