Disentangling the growth curve of microbial culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many researchers have studied the population dynamics of microbe of microbes as a typical example of population dynamics. The Monod equation, which mainly focuses on the growth and stationary phases, is used when plotting a growth curve. However, the growth potential in the late stage of culture has been overlooked. Previous studies considered the direct degradation of products to the limiting substrate. In this study, we considered microbial growth during the stationary phase, which enables us to describe the dynamics precisely. The microbes were divided into two populations: one grew by consuming the limiting substrate and the other degraded the products by metabolism. According to the numerical analysis of our model, microbes may choose one of two strategies: one consumes substrates and expands quickly, and the other grows slowly while cleaning up the environment in which they thrive. Furthermore, we found three types of microbial growth depending on their ability to detect metabolite accumulation. Using experimentally measured data, this model can estimate the dynamics of cell density, the substrates, and the metabolites used. The model's disentangling of growth curves offers novel interpretive possibilities for culture system dynamics.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".