MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150900885 · doi:10.1002/biot.201400068

Metabolic modeling of spatial heterogeneity of biofilms in microbial fuel cells reveals substrate limitations in electrical current generation

2014· article· en· W2150900885 on OpenAlexaff
Nadeera Jayasinghe, Ashley E. Franks, Kelly P. Nevin, Radhakrishnan Mahadevan

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Fuel Cells and Bioremediation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobial fuel cellGeobacter sulfurreducensBiofilmElectron acceptorAnodeGeobacterBiological systemBiochemical engineeringElectron transferChemistryMicroorganismMaterials scienceNanotechnologyBiologyElectrodeBacteriaBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) have been proposed as an alternative energy resource for the conversion of organic compounds to electricity. In an MFC, microorganisms such as Geobacter sulfurreducens form an anode-associated biofilm that can completely oxidize organic matter (electron donor) to carbon dioxide with direct electron transfer to the anode (electron acceptor). Mathematical models are useful in analyzing biofilm processes; however, existing models rely on Nernst-Monod type expressions, and evaluate extracellular processes separated from the intracellular metabolism of the microorganism. Thus, models that combine both extracellular and intracellular components, while addressing spatial heterogeneity, are essential for improved representation of biofilm processes. The goal of this work is to develop a model that integrates genome-scale metabolic models with the model of biofilm environment. This integrated model shows the variations of electrical current production and biofilm thickness under the presence/absence of NH4 in the bulk solution, and under varying maintenance energy demands. Further, sensitivity analysis suggested that conductivity is not limiting electrical current generation and that increasing cell density can lead to enhanced current generation. In addition, the modeling results also highlight instances such as the transformation into respiring cells, where the mechanism of electrical current generation during biofilm development is not yet clearly understood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology JournalSame topicMicrobial Fuel Cells and BioremediationFrench-language works237,207