Engineering Escherichia Coli for the Utilization of Ethylene Glycol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: A considerable challenge in the development of bioprocesses for producing chemicals and fuels has been the high cost of feedstocks relative to oil prices, making it difficult for these processes to compete with their conventional petrochemical counterparts. Hence, in the absence of high oil prices in the near future, there has been a shift in the industry to produce higher value compounds such as fragrances for cosmetics. Yet, there is still a need to address climate change and develop biotechnological approaches for producing large market, lower value chemicals and fuels.Results: In this work, we study ethylene glycol (EG), a novel feedstock that we believe has promise to address this challenge. We engineer Escherichia coli (E. coli) to consume EG and as a case study for chemical production, examine glycolate production. The best fermentation performance led to the production of 10.4 g/L of glycolate after 112 hours of production time in a fed-batch bioreactor. Our results clearly suggest that oxygen concentration is an important factor in the assimilation and use of EG as a substrate. We also find that the uptake rates for EG are sufficient to satisfy commercial benchmarks for productivity and yield. Finally, our use of metabolic modeling sheds light on the intracellular distribution through central metabolism implicating flux to 2-phosphoglycerate as the primary route for EG assimilation.Conclusion: Overall, our work suggests that EG could provide a renewable starting material for commercial biosynthesis of fuels and chemicals that may achieve economic parity with petrochemical feedstocks while sequestering carbon dioxide.
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) | 0.000 | 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".