MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Additional file 1 of Automation assisted anaerobic phenotyping for metabolic engineering

2021· article· en· W6902231473 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioreactorMetabolitePrincipal component analysisAnaerobic exerciseGrowth rateBiomass (ecology)Transformation (genetics)Escherichia coliSubstrate (aquarium)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 1: Table S1. Names and formulae of reaction abbreviations mentioned in Fig. 7 (main text). Metabolites in the reaction formulae are represented by their BiGG ID. Figure S1. Change in sterility with air-gap (data consolidated from main text Fig. 2d). Figure S2. Increase in pipetting error upon increasing pipetting speed by 300% for different volume ranges. Figure S3. Distribution of biomass yields (ratio of final to initial biomass) of wild type E. coli MG1655 grown in Rich Defined Media with different seals. Figure S4. Time-course showing cell density and instantaneous growth rate of different E. coli strains (described in Materials & methods) in RDM with and without a layer of oil in the presence of oxygen and with a layer of mineral oil inside an anaerobic chamber. Figure S5. Time-course showing cell density and instantaneous growth rate of E. coli strains (described in Materials & methods) with different pre-culturing strategies. Figure S6. Variance explained by each principal component for principal component analysis performed on metabolite yields and growth rates of E. coli strains (described in Materials & methods) grown in rich defined media in a bioreactor and microplates supplemented with reducing agents. Figure S7. Principal component analysis performed on the metabolite yields and growth rates of E. coli strains (described in Materials & methods) grown in rich defined media in a bioreactor and microplates supplemented with reducing agents. Figure S8. A comparison E. coli's metabolite yields and growth rates obtained from a bench-top 0.5 L bioreactor and 96-well microplates with different reducing agents for the strains: a. Wild Type MG1655, b. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D1, c. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D28, and d. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D59. Figure S9. Principal component analysis performed on the metabolite yields and growth rates of E. coli strains (described in Materials & methods) grown in rich defined media in a bioreactor and microplates supplemented with different substrate concentrations. Figure S10. A comparison E. coli's metabolite yields and growth rates obtained from a bench-top 0.5 L bioreactor and 96-well microplates with different initial glucose concentrations for the strains: a. Wild Type MG1655, b. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D1, c. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D28, and d. MG1655 Δ(adhE; pta)-D59.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8060.256

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207