↓ Skip to main content

Genetic improvement of native xylose-fermenting yeasts for ethanol production

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Genetic improvement of native xylose-fermenting yeasts for ethanol production
Published in
Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, November 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10295-014-1535-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole K. Harner, Xin Wen, Paramjit K. Bajwa, Glen D. Austin, Chi-Yip Ho, Marc B. Habash, Jack T. Trevors, Hung Lee

Abstract

Lignocellulosic substrates are the largest source of fermentable sugars for bioconversion to fuel ethanol and other valuable compounds. To improve the economics of biomass conversion, it is essential that all sugars in potential hydrolysates be converted efficiently into the desired product(s). While hexoses are fermented into ethanol and some high-value chemicals, the bioconversion of pentoses in hydrolysates remains inefficient. This remains one of the key challenges in lignocellulosic biomass conversion. Native pentose-fermenting yeasts can ferment both glucose and xylose in lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol. However, they perform poorly in the presence of hydrolysate inhibitors, exhibit low ethanol tolerance and glucose repression, and ferment pentoses less efficiently than the main hexoses glucose and mannose. This paper reviews classical and molecular strain improvement strategies applied to native pentose-fermenting yeasts for improved ethanol production from xylose and lignocellulosic substrates. We focus on Pachysolen tannophilus, Scheffersomyces (Candida) shehatae, Scheffersomyces (Pichia) stipitis, and Spathaspora passalidarum which are good ethanol producers among the native xylose-fermenting yeasts. Strains obtained thus far are not robust enough for efficient ethanol production from lignocellulosic hydrolysates and can benefit from further improvements.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Thailand 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 82 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 19%
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Bachelor 15 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 24%
Unspecified 7 8%
Chemical Engineering 6 7%
Engineering 6 7%
Other 13 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 November 2014.
All research outputs
#11,119,713
of 12,503,594 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology
#818
of 956 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,079
of 284,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology
#20
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,503,594 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 956 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,137 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.