Carbon preference by Cupriavidus necator for growth and accumulation phases: Heterotrophic vs. autotrophic metabolisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cupriavidus necator is a mixotrophic microbe capable of metabolizing both organic carbon (heterotrophic) and CO 2 (autotrophic) for cell growth and biodegradable plastic synthesis. This study investigates C. necator's behavior under mixotrophic conditions for cell growth and polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) accumulation. Various concentrations of organic substrates (acetate and butyrate from 10 to 1000 mg/L) and gaseous substrates (H 2 , O 2 , CO 2 ) were examined to monitor C. necator's substrate preferences. The results indicated a clear preference for organic carbon over CO 2 during cell growth. At relatively low organic concentrations (10–100 mg/L), gas utilization began after complete consumption of organic substrates. On the other hand, higher concentrations (500–1000 mg/L) led to a shift from the heterotrophic to mixotrophic metabolism around the 10-h mark due to the abundance of substrates. During PHA accumulation, C. necator initially favored the gaseous substrates (H 2 and CO 2 ) before shifting to the organic substrates, with mixotrophic behavior observed immediately at low organic concentrations. Additionally, high CO 2 partial pressure (>0.4 atm) inhibited microbial growth in both autotrophic and heterotrophic metabolisms. These findings highlight C. necator's adaptability under mixotrophic conditions and demonstrate the potential for mass-scale applications, such as microbial electrolysis cells to optimize biopolymer production and substrate utilization. • C. necator's substrate preference was explored under mixotrophic conditions. • C. necator prefers organic substrates for growth but CO₂/H₂ for PHA accumulation. • High CO₂ levels inhibited growth, impacting metabolic efficiency. • Bacteria shifted between metabolism types based on initial substrate concentration. • PHA production by C. necator using MECs is highly feasible.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".