MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807147085 · doi:10.1007/s10295-018-2053-1

Inactivation of the transcription factor <i>mig1</i> (<i>YGL035C</i>) in <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i> improves tolerance towards monocarboxylic weak acids: acetic, formic and levulinic acid

2018· article· en· W2807147085 on OpenAlexafffund
Víctor E. Balderas‐Hernández, Kevin Correia, Radhakrishnan Mahadevan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcetic acidLevulinic acidFormic acidSaccharomyces cerevisiaeCatabolite repressionBiochemistryChemistryFermentationYeastEthanolFormateEthanol fermentationFood scienceOrganic chemistryCatalysisGeneMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Toxic concentrations of monocarboxylic weak acids present in lignocellulosic hydrolyzates affect cell integrity and fermentative performance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In this work, we report the deletion of the general catabolite repressor Mig1p as a strategy to improve the tolerance of S. cerevisiae towards inhibitory concentrations of acetic, formic or levulinic acid. In contrast with the wt yeast, where the growth and ethanol production were ceased in presence of acetic acid 5 g/L or formic acid 1.75 g/L (initial pH not adjusted), the m9 strain (Δmig1::kan) produced 4.06 ± 0.14 and 3.87 ± 0.06 g/L of ethanol, respectively. Also, m9 strain tolerated a higher concentration of 12.5 g/L acetic acid (initial pH adjusted to 4.5) without affecting its fermentative performance. Moreover, m9 strain produced 33% less acetic acid and 50-70% less glycerol in presence of weak acids, and consumed acetate and formate as carbon sources under aerobic conditions. Our results show that the deletion of Mig1p provides a single gene deletion target for improving the acid tolerance of yeast strains significantly.

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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Industrial Microbiology & BiotechnologySame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207