Sustainable biosurfactant production from secondary feedstock—recent advances, process optimization and perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biosurfactants have garnered increased attention lately due to their superiority of their properties over fossil-derived counterparts. While the cost of production remains a significant hurdle to surpass synthetic surfactants, biosurfactants have been anticipated to gain a larger market share in the coming decades. Among these, glycolipids, a type of low-molecular-weight biosurfactant, stand out for their efficacy in reducing surface and interfacial tension, which made them highly sought-after for various surfactant-related applications. Glycolipids are composed of hydrophilic carbohydrate moieties linked to hydrophobic fatty acid chains through ester bonds that mainly include rhamnolipids, trehalose lipids, sophorolipids, and mannosylerythritol lipids. This review highlights the current landscape of glycolipids and covers specific glycolipid productivity and the diverse range of products found in the global market. Applications such as bioremediation, food processing, petroleum refining, biomedical uses, and increasing agriculture output have been discussed. Additionally, the latest advancements in production cost reduction for glycolipid and the challenges of utilizing second-generation feedstocks for sustainable production are also thoroughly examined. Overall, this review proposes a balance between environmental advantages, economic viability, and societal benefits through the optimized integration of secondary feedstocks in biosurfactant 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".