Comparative testing of tangential microfiltration for microbial cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an attempt to extend and intensify the productive periods of bioprocesses, a self-cleaning tangential filtration device was examined. Built into a special-design bioreactor, its cell retention was evaluated for continuous-flow operation with selected examples of bacteria (Escherichia coli), yeasts (Sacharomyces cerevisiae), and filamentous fungi (Aspergillus niger). Performance characteristics such as filtration rates and cell accumulation were assessed as a function of filter rotational speed, operating pressure, cultivation time, and microfilter type (i.e., membrane or porous metallic). The highest flux of cell-free filtrate for each culture type was achieved using a 0.45-micron membrane-covered microfilter. While the respective yeast (S. cerevisiae) and bacterial (E. coli) cell concentrations were enhanced by as much as 16- and 8-fold over the batch growth levels, the representative A. niger fungal cultivation was less satisfactory because of progressively declining filtration rates limited by hydraulically resistant layers of microbial surface growth quite resistant to in situ filter backflushing with gas. Maximum steady-state flux was independent of operating pressure, yet was enhanced at rotational speeds up to about 800 rpm. Higher speeds offered no further improvements. The overall fermentation process was limited by the moderate levels of attainable flux which restricted the feed and dilution rates. The maximum attainable stabilized fluxes were 26-40 L/m(2) x h.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".