↓ Skip to main content

Foam-free production of Surfactin via anaerobic fermentation of Bacillus subtilis DSM 10T

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Foam-free production of Surfactin via anaerobic fermentation of Bacillus subtilis DSM 10T
Published in
AMB Express, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13568-015-0107-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judit Willenbacher, Jens-Tilman Rau, Jonas Rogalla, Christoph Syldatk, Rudolf Hausmann

Abstract

Surfactin is one of the most popular biosurfactants due to its numerous potential applications. The usually aerobic production via fermentation of Bacillus subtilis is accompanied by vigorous foaming which leads to complex constructions and great expense. Therefore it is reasonable to search for alternative foam-free production processes. The current study introduces a novel approach to produce Surfactin in a foam-free process applying a strictly anaerobic bioreactor cultivation. The process was performed several times with different glucose concentrations in mineral salt medium. The fermentations were analyzed regarding specific (qSurfactin, vol. qSurfactin) and overall product yields (YP/X, YP/S) as well as substrate utilization (YX/S). Fermentations in which 2.5 g/L glucose were employed proofed to be the most effective, reaching product yields of YP/X = 0.278 g/g. Most interesting, the product yields exceeded classical aerobic fermentations, in which foam fractionation was applied. Additionally, values for specific production rate qSurfactin (0.005 g/(g∙h)) and product yield per consumed substrate (YP/S = 0.033 g/g) surpass results of comparable foam-free processes. The current study introduces an alternative to produce a biosurfactant that overcomes the challenges of severe foaming and need for additional constructions.

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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 71 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 21%
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Unspecified 4 6%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 17%
Chemical Engineering 10 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 8%
Unspecified 4 6%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 9 13%

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 25 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,611,925
of 4,921,283 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#108
of 239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,895
of 145,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,921,283 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 239 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 145,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.