MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173721915 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24236

Production of β‐glucosidase by <i>Aspergillus niger</i>   <scp>CDBB‐H</scp> ‐175 on submerged fermentation

2021· article· en· W3173721915 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cristian Alarid‐García, Oscar M. Hernández‐Calderón, Erika Y. Rios‐Iribe, Marcos D. González‐Llanes, Eleazar M. Escamilla‐Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaltoseBioreactorFermentationAerationAspergillus nigerFood scienceChemistryHydrolysisSubstrate (aquarium)AirliftBiofuelPulp and paper industrySucroseBiochemistryBiotechnologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The production of high‐activity β‐glucosidase at low cost is essential to increase the efficiency of cellulose hydrolysis, necessary for the economically feasible production of biofuels from the conversion of renewable lignocellulosic resources, specifically agricultural waste. In this work, the Aspergillus niger CDBB‐H‐175 strain was used for the production of extracellular β‐glucosidase. In the first stage of this work, the production of β‐glucosidase was carried out in a shake flask, using different carbon sources in order to evaluate the effect of the substrate on enzyme activity; in this way, it was determined that the best substrate is maltose, obtaining 2954 U/ml of β‐glucosidase activity at 31 days of culture. In the second stage, a laboratory‐scale study was done using two discontinuous bioreactor systems for submerged fermentation, stirred tank and airlift, using maltose, sucrose, and glucose as a carbon source. The results showed that β‐glucosidase with the highest enzymatic activity (3122 U/ml at 192 h of fermentation) was produced at uncontrolled pH conditions in an airlift bioreactor with maltose. In a third stage, using an airlift bioreactor with maltose, an orthogonal experimental design L 4 with three factors was applied: pH, aeration, and maltose concentration. The aeration was of utmost importance to guarantee a better enzymatic expression, and acidification of the culture medium during the fermentation process was another necessary condition for a greater enzymatic production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.173
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207