Bioproduction of <i>cis</i>‐(1S,2R)‐indandiol, a chiral pharmaceutical intermediate, using a solid–liquid two‐phase partitioning bioreactor for enhanced removal of inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: A solid‐liquid two‐phase partitioning bioreactor (TPPB) was used in the biotransformation of indene to cis ‐(1S,2R)‐indandiol by Pseudomonas putida 421‐5 (ATCC 55687). Metered substrate feeding in single‐phase operation, or delivery from an immiscible liquid, have previously been employed to regulate the exposure of the biocatalyst to inhibitory concentrations of the substrate. In contrast, the solid‐liquid platform provided in situ substrate addition (ISSA) as well as simultaneous it in situ product removal (ISPR) as a means of overcoming substrate and product toxicity. Three different modes of operation were compared for their effects on the performance of this biotransformation: single‐phase, fed‐batch operation was carried out as a benchmark in 2.75 L aqueous medium, and subsequently with the inclusion of either 700 g liquid silicone oil or 700 g solid polymer beads. RESULTS: Biphasic modes achieved a 3‐fold productivity improvement with respect to single‐phase (30 to 90 mg L −1 h −1 ), and solid‐liquid productivity was similar to liquid‐liquid operation while achieving more extensive removal of inhibitory compounds resulting in a slightly higher product titer (1.29 vs 1.16 g L −1 ). The operability of the reactor was improved by the phase stability of the solid polymer beads relative to immiscible organic solvents, preventing emulsion formation and facilitating analytics. CONCLUSION: Solid polymer beads replaced the immiscible liquid auxiliary phase for substrate delivery while performing simultaneous inhibitory molecule sequestration. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".