MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154399094 · doi:10.1139/w00-089

Nutritional requirements of<i>Brettanomyces bruxellensis</i>: Growth and physiology in batch and chemostat cultures

2000· article· en· W2154399094 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
María Guadalupe Aguilar‐Uscanga, Marie-Line Délia, Pierre Strehaiano

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicActinomycetales infections and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemostatBiologyFood scienceMicrobiologyBiotechnologyBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nutritional requirements of Brettanomyces bruxellensis have been investigated. Batch culture and chemostat pulse techniques were used to identify growth-limiting nutrients. The study included determination of the essential components of the culture medium and quantification of the effects of the components. Among the components tested, ammonium sulfate and yeast extract had a significant effect on glucose consumption, growth, and ethanol production. However, if the ammonium sulfate concentration is above 2 g/L, an inhibitory effect on B. bruxellensis growth is observed. The yeast extract appears to be the most important and significant component for growth. The maximum amount of synthesized biomass is proportional to the concentration of yeast extract added to the culture broth (in the tested range). Magnesium and phosphate ions are probably not essential for B. bruxellensis. These ions appear to be supplied in sufficient amounts by the yeast extract in the culture medium. Brettanomyces bruxellensis appears to have very low nutritional requirements for growth.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations63
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicActinomycetales infections and treatmentFrench-language works237,207