| Title |
Effects of feedstock and co-culture of Lactobacillus fermentum and wild Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain during fuel ethanol fermentation by the industrial yeast strain PE-2
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AMB Express, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13568-018-0556-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vanda R. Reis, Ana Paula G. Bassi, Bianca C. Cerri, Amanda R. Almeida, Isis G. B. Carvalho, Reinaldo G. Bastos, Sandra R. Ceccato-Antonini |
| Abstract |
Even though contamination by bacteria and wild yeasts are frequently observed during fuel ethanol fermentation, our knowledge regarding the effects of both contaminants together is very limited, especially considering that the must composition can vary from exclusively sugarcane juice to a mixture of molasses and juice, affecting the microbial development. Here we studied the effects of the feedstock (sugarcane juice and molasses) and the co-culture of Lactobacillus fermentum and a wild Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain (rough colony and pseudohyphae) in single and multiple-batch fermentation trials with an industrial strain of S. cerevisiae (PE-2) as starter yeast. The results indicate that in multiple-cycle batch system, the feedstock had a minor impact on the fermentation than in single-cycle batch system, however the rough yeast contamination was more harmful than the bacterial contamination in multiple-cycle batch fermentation. The inoculation of both contaminants did not potentiate the detrimental effect in any substrate. The residual sugar concentration in the fermented broth had a higher concentration of fructose than glucose for all fermentations, but in the presence of the rough yeast, the discrepancy between fructose and glucose concentrations were markedly higher, especially in molasses. The biggest problem associated with incomplete fermentation seemed to be the lower consumption rate of sugar and the reduced fructose preference of the rough yeast rather than the lower invertase activity. Lower ethanol production, acetate production and higher residual sugar concentration are characteristics strongly associated with the rough yeast strain and they were not potentiated with the inoculation of L. fermentum. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 12 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 12% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,376,243
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#304
of 1,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,600
of 336,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#9
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,241 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 336,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.