MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075751235 · doi:10.3109/07388551.2014.992386

Cell immobilization for microbial production of 1,3-propanediol

2015· review· en· W2075751235 on OpenAlexaff
Mine Güngörmüşler, Nazim Çiçek, David B. Levin, Nuri Azbar

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Biotechnology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioreactorContinuous production1,3-PropanediolBiochemical engineeringFermentationProduction (economics)Pulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringChemistryBiotechnologyFood scienceBiologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cell and enzyme immobilization are often used for industrial production of high-value products. In recent years, immobilization techniques have been applied to the production of value-added chemicals such as 1,3-Propanediol (1,3-PDO). Biotechnological fermentation is an attractive alternative to current 1,3-PDO production methods, which are primarily thermochemical processes, as it generates high volumetric yields of 1,3-PDO, is a much less energy intensive process, and generates lower amounts of environmental organic pollutants. Although several approaches including: batch, fed-batch, continuous-feed and two-step continuous-feed were tested in suspended systems, it has been well demonstrated that cell immobilization techniques can significantly enhance 1,3-PDO production and allow robust continuous production in smaller bioreactors. This review covers various immobilization methods and their application for 1,3-PDO production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations45
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in BiotechnologySame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207