pH, pCO <sub>2</sub> , and Temperature Effect on R‐Adenovirus Production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of pH, carbon dioxide vapor pressure, pCO(2), and temperature on E1 and E3 deleted recombinant adenovirus vector (rAV) production with HEK293S cells have been studied in the ranges of pH = 6.7-7.7, pCO(2) = 0.05-0.20 atm, and T = 32-39 degrees C, respectively. The experiments were performed in four 500-mL bioreactors in parallel, which make possible the reduction of inter-run variability. Cell concentration and viability, relative oxygen uptake rate (OUR), fluorescence, and viral titer were measured. It was found that, although pH and pCO(2) did not affect significantly cell viability in the range studied, they had an important effect on virus titer. pCO(2) allowed the maximum production of rAV at 0.05 atm, and pH showed a very sharp optimum at 7.2. Temperature had an effect on both cell metabolism and virus titer. Low temperature prolonged cell viability and high OUR. Most of all, a 3-fold increase in virus yield was found at 35 degrees C compared to that at 37 degrees C, while 32 degrees C was not as beneficial (1.5-fold increase). This finding could have an important impact on large-scale production. This phenomenon was modeled using a simple 3-parameter synthesis-decay model. This model shows how the optimum gain in virus production at 35 degrees C is due to a balance between the production and decay processes at that temperature.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".