MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hydrogen bioproduction with Enterobacter sp. isolated from brewery wastewater

2017· article· en· W2575879278 on OpenAlexaff
Carolina Zampol Lázaro, Renan Pachiega, Maria Bernadete Amâncio Varesche, Rodrigo Sequinel, José Eduardo de Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Hydrogen Energy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFundação para o Desenvolvimento da UNESPConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsBioproduction16S ribosomal RNAEnterobacterMesophileWastewaterFermentationBacteriaEnterobacter cloacaeChemistryFood scienceAcetic acidHydrogenMicrobiologyBiologyBiochemistryOrganic chemistryEnterobacteriaceaeEscherichia coliWaste managementGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen-producing bacterial strains were isolated from granular sludge from a UASB reactor that treats brewery wastewater. Most of the isolated strains were related to the Enterobacter genus through a phylogenetic analysis of the 16S rRNA sequences. The strains could use various carbon sources (sugars and glycerol) to produce hydrogen . The isolated strain, identified as Enterobacter sp. based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing, produced 6.8 mmol H 2 L −1 culture medium when growing on glucose (2.0 g L −1 ) in anaerobic conditions at 30 °C. The main liquid metabolites were acetic acid (367 mg L −1 ), methanol (437 mg L −1 ) and ethanol (1101.26 mg L −1 ), after 9 h of fermentation. The maximum hydrogen yield of 0.8 mol H 2 /mol glucose was observed, indicating that Enterobacter sp. isolated from brewery wastewater was an efficient hydrogen-producing bacterium under mesophilic conditions.

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)0.000
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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations53
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Hydrogen EnergySame topicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionFrench-language works237,207