Comparison of emulsion and vibration nozzle methods for microencapsulation of laccase and glucose oxidase by interfacial reticulation of poly(ethyleneimine)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microcapsules for enzyme immobilization were successfully fabricated via interfacial cross-linking of poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI). A method based on laminar jet break-up technique using a commercial instrument developed to produce alginate beads is reported for the first time for production of PEI microcapsules. The diameter, wall thickness and pore size of membranes were obtained from confocal laser scanning microscopy by labelling PEI and proteins. The composition of membranes was analysed by elemental analysis. Larger microcapsules (ca 200 µm diameter) were obtained with the encapsulation device. In comparison, the emulsion method produced smaller capsules (ca 20 µm diameter) but with a wider size distribution. Encapsulation efficiency for both methods was analysed by bicinchoninic acid and fluorescence assays, yielding efficiencies of 94 ± 2% and 83 ± 3% for the emulsion method and encapsulation device, respectively. Glucose oxidase from Aspergillus Niger and Laccase from Trametes Versicolor were encapsulated by both microencapsulation methods and their activities were compared.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".