MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950686963 · doi:10.1089/ind.2019.0002

Acetone–Butanol–Ethanol Production from Eastern Canadian Yellow Birch and Screening of Isopropanol–Butanol–Ethanol-Producing Strains

2019· article· en· W2950686963 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marzouk Benali, Olumoye Ajao, Naïma El Mehdi, Andrea M. Restrepo, Narimene Fradj, Yacine Boumghar

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial Biotechnology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClostridium acetobutylicumFermentationButanolClostridium beijerinckiiAcetoneChemistryBiofuelEthanolRaw materialAcetic acidFood scienceHydrolysisSugarBiomass (ecology)SolventBiochemistryOrganic chemistryBiotechnologyBiologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yellow birch barks is one of the abundant species in Quebec with harvest surplus in several regions. Biofuels or biochemicals such as biobutanol can be produced using the surplus feedstock, however challenges such as the cost of pretreatment, production of unwanted by-products in the fermentation process, and the efficient recovery of solvents must be addressed to make it feasible. The objectives of this study are to establish the optimal conditions to produce biobutanol from Eastern Canadian yellow birch; to identify natural/local Clostridium sp. strains that are capable of producing Isopropanol-Butanol-Ethanol (IBE) from synthetic sugar mixtures, as candidates for metabolic engineering and to benchmark solvent producing ability with commercially available strains; and to elucidate the challenges of paradigm shift to IBE production. Alkali pretreatment of the biomass using chemical that are present in the Kraft process were performed, followed by enzymatic hydrolysis to obtain fermentable sugars and subsequent fermentation with Clostridium acetobutylicum DSM 792. The results showed that the produced Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol (ABE) solvent concentration were 6.6–8.2 g/L of acetone; 11.2–13.1 g/L of butanol; and 2.5–2.7 g/L of ethanol. The organic acids concentration was acetic acid, 1.1–1.8 g/L, and butyric acid, 0.1–0.2 g/L. Further fermentation experiments to benchmark IBE were performed using both Clostridium beijerinckii DSM 6423 and wild isolated strains, which revealed the gaps in terms of yields and the need to optimize the fermentation paradigm. Moreover, alternative process sequences for product recovery were identified, and the impact of prior liquid-liquid extraction elucidated.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.182 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial BiotechnologySame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207