MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550559046 · doi:10.1002/cssc.201601007

High Biofilm Conductivity Maintained Despite Anode Potential Changes in a <i>Geobacter</i>‐Enriched Biofilm

2016· article· en· W2550559046 on OpenAlexaff
Bipro Ranjan Dhar, Hodon Ryu, Hao Ren, Jorge W. Santo Domingo, Junkseck Chae, Hyung‐Sool Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueChemSusChem · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Fuel Cells and Bioremediation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnodeBiofilmGeobacterGeobacter sulfurreducensKineticsElectron transferChemical engineeringMaterials scienceChemistryElectrodePhotochemistryBacteriaBiologyPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study systematically assessed intracellular electron transfer (IET) and extracellular electron transfer (EET) kinetics with respect to anode potential (Eanode) in a mixed‐culture biofilm anode enriched with Geobacter spp. High biofilm conductivity (0.96–1.24 mS cm−1) was maintained during Eanode changes from −0.2 to +0.2 V versus the standard hydrogen electrode (SHE), although the steady‐state current density significantly decreased from 2.05 to 0.35 A m−2 in a microbial electrochemical cell. Substantial increase of the Treponema population was observed in the biofilm anode at Eanode=+0.2 V, which reduced intracellular electron‐transfer kinetics associated with the maximum specific substrate‐utilization rate by a factor of ten. This result suggests that fast EET kinetics can be maintained under dynamic Eanode conditions in a highly conductive biofilm anode as a result of shift of main EET players in the biofilm anode, although Eanode changes can influence IET kinetics.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations33
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemSusChemSame topicMicrobial Fuel Cells and BioremediationFrench-language works237,207