MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339162062 · doi:10.1149/ma2016-01/39/1974

An LED-Based Fluorescent Sensing System for on-Site Microalgal Detection

2016· article· en· W2339162062 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Young-Ho Shin, Jonathan Z. Barnett, Maria Teresa Gutierrez‐Wing, Kelly A. Rusch, Jin‐Woo Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhycocyaninCyanobacteriaFluorescenceChlorophyll fluorescenceLight-emitting diodeChlorophyllEnvironmental scienceBotanyBiologyMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsPhysicsOpticsBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we present a fluorescent sensing system capable of simultaneously detecting two species during microalgal co-culture, in which microalgae ( C. vulgaris ) and cyanobacteria ( Leptolyngbya sp. ) are the target species for detection. The sensing system has two different excitation light sources for stimulating chlorophyll a in microalgae and phycocyanin pigment in cyanobacteria, respectively, and a photodetector to measure corresponding fluorescent signals. This work is a significant improvement over our previous report on a fluorescent sensing system for single species [1]. Microalgae are one of the promising alternative energy sources [2]. Recent reports show that a co-culture system enhances biofuel production [3] and it is desired to monitor the population of each species. The co-inoculation of microalgae and cyanobacteria promotes the growth rate and lifespan of microalgae [4,5]. It is highly desired to simultaneously monitor the populations of microalgae and cyanobacteria in order to obtain highly efficient biofuel production. A common method is bench-top flow cytometry, which is time consuming, expensive, and difficult to deploy for on-site detection. The proposed portable fluorescent sensing system can be a viable option for on-site monitoring of co-culture solution containing microalgae and cyanobacteria. For the fluorescent sensing system, blue LEDs (448 nm peak wavelength) were selected for stimulating microalgae and amber LEDs (590 nm) for cyanobacteria. A highly sensitive silicon photomuliplier, MicroFC (SensL Inc., Cork, Ireland), was implemented to detect a low fluorescent signal from phycocyanin in cyanobacteria. Chlorophyll a and phycocyanin emit fluorescent light with the peak wavelength around 680 nm and 645 nm, respectively. Two long-pass filters, a dichroic filter with 647 nm cut-off (PIXELTEQ, Largo, FL, USA) and a color filter with 645 nm cut-off (Edmund Optics, Barrington, NJ, USA), are placed in front of the silicon photomultiplier to block the excitation light as illustrated in Figure 1. Measured results show that the photocurrent increases with the population of microalgae under the blue excitation light while its change is not significant to the amber light. Likewise, the photocurrent increases with the concentration of phycocyanin pigments under the amber excitation light while its response to the blue light is minimal. In summary, we have developed and demonstrated a portable fluorescent sensing system that is capable of differentiating microalgae and cyanobacteria. With further optimization, the developed system can be deployed in a biofuel production system for continuous monitoring of co-culture solution. Future work will also include integrated electronic circuitry for a fully standalone fluorescent detection system. References: [1] Y.-H. Shin, J. Z. Barnett, E. Song, M. T. Gutierrez-Wing, K. A. Rusch and J.-W. Choi, Microelectronic Engineering. 144 (2015) 6-11. [2] Y. Chisti, Biotechnology Advances. 25 (2007) 294-306. [3] A. Silaban, R. Bai, M. T. Gutierrez-Wing, I. I. Negulescu, and K. A. Rusch. Engineering in Life Sciences. 14 (2014) 47-56. [4] L. E. Gonzalez and Y. Bashan, Applied And Environmental Microbiology. 66 (2000) 1527-1531. [5] L. E. de-Bashan, Y. Bashan, M. Moreno, V. K. Lebsky, and J. J. Bustillos, Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 48 (2002) 514-521. Figure 1

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207