MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390849681 · doi:10.1016/j.biotno.2024.01.003

Identifying Chlorella vulgaris and Chlorella sorokiniana as sustainable organisms to bioconvert glucosamine into valuable biomass

2024· article· en· W4390849681 on OpenAlexaff
Hosam Elhalis, Mohamed Helmy, Sherilyn Ho, Sharon Leow, Yan Liu, Kumar Selvarajoo, Yvonne Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Notes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersAgency for Science, Technology and Research
KeywordsChlorella sorokinianaGlucosamineChlorella vulgarisChitinBiomass (ecology)BiologyFood scienceChlorellaBotanyBiochemistryChemistryAlgaeAgronomyChitosan

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chitin is a major component of various wastes such as crustacean shells, filamentous fungi, and insects. Recently, food-safe biological and chemical processes converting chitin to glucosamine have been developed. Here, we studied microalgae that can uptake glucosamine as vital carbon and nitrogen sources for valuable alternative protein biomass. Utilizing data mining and bioinformatics analysis, we identified 29 species that contain the required enzymes for glucosamine to glucose conversion. The growth performance of the selected strains was examined, and glucosamine was used in different forms and concentrations. Glucose at a concentration of 2.5 g/L was required to initiate glucosamine metabolic degradation by Chlorella vulgaris and Chlorella sorokiniana. Glucosamine HCl and glucosamine phosphate showed maximum cell counts of about 8.5 and 9.0 log/mL for C. sorokiniana and C. vulgaris in 14 days, respectively. Enzymatic hydrolysis of glucosamine increased growth performance with C. sorokiniana by about 3 folds. The adapted strains were fast-growing and could double their dry biomasses during the same incubation time. In addition, adapted C. sorokiniana was able to tolerate three times glucosamine concentration in the medium. The study illustrated possible strategies for employing C. sorokiniana and C. vulgaris to convert glucosamine into valuable biomass in a more sustainable way.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology NotesSame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207