MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913072054 · doi:10.1515/amylase-2018-0006

Archaeal and bacterial thermostable amylopullulanases: characteristic features and biotechnological applications

2018· article· en· W2913072054 on OpenAlexaff
T. Satyanarayana, M. Nisha

Bibliographic record

VenueAmylase · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnzyme Production and Characterization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycosidic bondPullulanAmylopectinThermophilePullulanaseHydrolysisAmylaseStarchChemistryAmyloseBiochemistryGlycoside hydrolaseEnzymeBacteriaReducing sugarSugarExtremophileSulfolobus solfataricusArchaeaFood sciencePolysaccharideBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Amylopullulanases are endoacting bifunctional enzymes capable of hydrolyzing α-1,4- and α-1,6-glycosidic linkages in starch, amylose, pullulan, amylopectin and related oligosaccharides. These enzymes possess single or dual active site(s) for cleaving α-1,4- and α-1,6-glycosidic bonds; the former are called amylopullulanases, and the latter, α-amylase-pullulanases. These are grouped into GH13 and GH57 families based on the architecture of the catalytic domain and the number of conserved sequence regions. The amylopullulanases/α-amylasepullulanases are produced by bacteria as well as archaea, and among them, thermophilic and hyperthermophilic species are the major producers. The thermostable amylopullulanases find application in one-step starch liquefaction-saccharification to form various sugar syrups and maltooligosaccharides. The starch saccharification process catalysed by amylopullulanases minimizes the use of other amylolytic enzymes, like α-amylase and glucoamylase, thereby reducing the cost of sugar syrups. The enzymes also find applications in bread making as an anti-stale and as a detergent additive.

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 score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmylaseSame topicEnzyme Production and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207