Polymer Development for Enhanced Delivery of Phenol in a Solid-Liquid Two-Phase Partitioning Bioreactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two-Phase Partitioning Bioreactors (TPPBs) have traditionally been used to partition toxic concentrations of xenobiotics from a cell-containing aqueous phase by means of an immiscible organic solvent and to deliver these substrates back to the cells on the basis of metabolic demand and the maintenance of thermodynamic equilibrium between the phases. A limitation of TPPBs, which use organic liquid solvents, is the possibility that the solvent can be bioavailable, and this has therefore limited organic liquid TPPBs to the use of pure strains of microbes. Solid polymer beads have recently been introduced as a replacement for liquid organic solvents, offering similar absorption properties but with the capability to be used with mixed microbial populations. The present work was aimed at identifying a polymer with a greater capacity for and more rapid uptake and release of phenol for use as the second phase in a mixed culture TPPB. Polarity and hydrogen bonding capabilities between polymer and phenol were considered in the screening and selection process of candidate polymers. Hytrel (a copolymer of poly(butylene terephthalate) and butylene ether glycol terephthalate) polymer beads, offered improved capacity (19 mg phenol/g polymer at a fixed initial phenol concentration of 2000 mg/L) and a greater diffusivity (1.54 x 10(-7) cm2/s) when compared to the capacity and diffusivity of previously used EVA (ethylene vinyl acetate) beads (12.4 mg phenol/g polymer and 3.73 x 10(-9) cm2/s, respectively). Hytrel polymer beads were then used in a TPPB for the investigation of various substrate feeding strategies (fed-batch, bead replacement, and concentrated spikes of phenol), with rapid and complete phenol degradation shown in all cases.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".