Lipid and carotenoid synthesis by <i>Rhodosporidium diobovatum</i>, grown on glucose versus glycerol, and its biodiesel properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relationships between lipid and carotenoid synthesis by Rhodosporidium diobovatum were investigated for cell cultures in nitrogen-limited medium (GMY) containing equimolar amounts of carbon of glucose or glycerol. The cultures were also supplemented with additional substrate at 120 h postinoculation (pi) and during a fed-batch experiment. Growth of R. diobovatum on glucose resulted in higher yields of triacyglycerides (TAGs) and carotenoid than when grown on glycerol, even though the cultures contained equimolar amounts of carbon. After the addition of fresh substrate at 120 h pi, total carotenoid concentrations were significantly different from the concentrations measured at 120 h pi in both glucose and glycerol cultures, with no concomitant increase in lipid concentrations, suggesting that carotenoid synthesis is linked to exponential-phase growth, while lipid synthesis is linked to stationary phase. We also compared the calculated properties of biodiesel that could be made with TAGs derived from R. diobovatum with properties of biodiesel made from TAGs of other oleaginous yeasts, microalgae, vegetable oils, and animal fats. This study shows that R. diobovatum can be an effective strain for production of neutral lipids containing high percentages of oleic acid, palmitic acid, and linoleic acid, as well as carotenoids.
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".