Increased pigment and lipid content, lipid variety, and cell and population size of the microalgae <i>Chlorella </i>spp. when co-immobilized in alginate beads with the microalgae-growth-promoting bacterium <i>Azospirillum brasilense</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three strains of the freshwater microalgae used for wastewater treatment, Chlorella vulgaris and Chlorella sorokiniana co-immobilized separately in alginate beads with the microalgae-growth-promoting bacterium Azospirillum brasilense Cd, resulted in significant changes in microalgal-population size, cell size, cell cytology, pigment, lipid content, and the variety of fatty acids produced in comparison with microalgae immobilized in alginate without the bacterium. Cells of C. vulgaris UTEX 2714 did not change in size, but the population size within the beads significantly increased. On the other hand, C. vulgaris UTEX 395 cells grew 62% larger, but their numbers did not increase. The population of C. sorokiniana UTEX 1602 increased, but not their cell size. The content of pigments chlorophyll a and b, lutein, and violoaxanthin increased in all microalgal species. The lipid content also significantly increased in all three strains, and the number of different fatty acids in the microalgae increased from four to eight. This study indicates that the microalgae-growth-promoting bacterium induced significant changes in the metabolism of the microalgae.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".