Utilization of date syrup as a substrate for carotenoid production by Rhodotorula glutinis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential use of date syrup, for the production of carotenoids by Rhodotorula glutinisin batch fermentation process, was investigated during 7 days. The results revealed that carbon (glucose or date syrup) and nitrogen sources [yeast extract, (NH4)2SO4 and NH4NO3] had a significant influence on biomass and carotenoid production. Maximum yield of total carotenoid production (7.94 mg/L) with carotene content (2040 μg/g) and biomass (3.90 g/L) was obtained from R. glutinis after 7 days of fermentation in a substrate containing date syrup and yeast extract. The highest biomass (8.03 g/L) was obtained in the culture containing glucose and yeast extract, while the total carotenoid content of 6.72 mg/L with 836.86 μg/g carotene was produced in this medium. Significant differences were observed when comparing the average biomass and total carotenoid productions in different cultures and fermentation times. Our results demonstrated that date syrup (from low quality dates), as aby-product at a lower price, could be profitably used as a suitable carbon source for carotenoid production by R. glutinis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".