Short-term deleterious effects of standard isolation and cultivation methods on new tropical freshwater microalgae strains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Algae with potential biotechnological applications in different industries are commonly isolate from the environment in order to obtain pure (axenic) stocks that can be safely stored for long periods of time. To obtain axenic cultures, antibiotics are frequently used, and cryopreservation is applied to keep standing stocks. However, many of these now standard methods were developed using strains coming from pristine-to-low intervened environments and cold-to-temperate regions. Thus, it is still not well understand the potential effect of said methods on the life cycle and biochemical profile of algae isolates from hiper-eutrophic and constant high-temperature tropical regions, which could potentially render them unsuitable for their intended biotechnological application. In this study, we conducted a genetic characterization (18S rRNA) and evaluated the effect of purification (use of the antibiotic chloramphenicol, CPA) and cryopreservation (dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-sucrose mix and Glycerol) on the growth rate and lipid content of four new tropical freshwater algal isolates: Chorella sp. M2, Chlorella sp. M6, Scenedesmus sp. R3, and Coelastrella sp . A2, from the Ecuadorian coast. The genetic characterization showed a clear discrimination between strains. All strains cultured with CPA had a lower growth rate. After cryopreservation Coelastrella sp. A2 did not grow with both methods; Chorella sp . M2, Chlorella sp. M6 and Scenedesmus sp. R3 presented no significant difference in growth rate between the cryopreservants. A significantly higher lipid content was observed in biomass cryopreserved with glycerol in relation to DMSO-sucrose, with Chorella sp . M2 and Chlorella sp. M6 having twice as much in the first treatment. The results highlight the relevance of choosing an appropriate method for storage as the materials used can affect the biological performance of different tropical species, although is still to determine if the effects observed here are long lasting in subsequent cultures of these algae.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".