MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113935469 · doi:10.1002/bit.20838

Tolerance and adaptation of ethanologenic yeasts to lignocellulosic inhibitory compounds

2006· article· en· W2113935469 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology and Bioengineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFurfuralFermentationChemistryEthanolFood scienceSugarEthanol fuelAcetic acidYeastHexoseEthanol fermentationBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic mixtures of predominant lignocellulosic hexose sugars were supplemented with separate aliquots of three inhibitory compounds (furfural, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), and acetic acid) in a series of concentrations and fermented by the spent sulfite liquor (SSL)-adapted yeast strain Tembec T1 and the natural isolate Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) Y-1528 to compare tolerance and assess fermentative efficacy. The performance of Y-1528 exceeded that of Tembec T1 by a significant margin, with faster hexose sugar consumption, higher ethanol productivity, and in the case of furfural and HMF, faster inhibitor consumption. Nevertheless, furfural had a dose-proportionate effect on sugar consumption rate and ethanol productivity in both strains, but did not substantially affect ethanol yield. HMF had a similar effect on sugar consumption rate and ethanol productivity, and also lowered ethanol yield. Surprisingly, acetic acid had the least impact on sugar consumption rate and ethanol productivity, and stimulated ethanol yield at moderate concentrations. Sequential iterations of softwood (SW) and hardwood (HW) SSL were subsequently inoculated with the two yeast strains in order to compare adaptation to, and performance in lignocellulosic substrates in a cell recycle batch fermentation (CRBF) regime. Both strains were severely affected by the HW SSL, which was attributed to specific syringyl lignin-derived degradation products and synergistic interactions between inhibitors. Though ethanologenic capacity was preserved, a net loss of performance was evident from both strains, indicating the absence of adaptation to the substrates, regardless of the sequence in which the SSL types were employed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.168 · 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