Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20233443›Full record

ArticleBMC biotechnology2010

Replication methods and tools in high-throughput cultivation processes - recognizing potential variations of growth and product formation by on-line monitoring.

Robert Huber, Thomas G Palmen, Nadine Ryk, Anne-Kathrin Hillmer, Karina Luft, Frank Kensy, Jochen Büchs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biotechnology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Robert HuberAVT-Aachener Verfahrenstechnik, Biochemical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Worringerweg 1, D-52074 Aachen, Germany.
Thomas G Palmen
Nadine Ryk
Anne-Kathrin Hillmer
Karina Luft
Frank Kensy
Jochen Büchs

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-throughput cultivations in microtiter plates are the method of choice to express proteins from recombinant clone libraries. Such processes typically include several steps, whereby some of them are linked by replication steps: transformation, plating, colony picking, preculture, main culture and induction. In this study, the effects of conventional replication methods and replication tools (8-channel pipette, 96-pin replicators: steel replicator with fixed or spring-loaded pins, plastic replicator with fixed pins) on growth kinetics of Escherichia coli SCS1 pQE-30 pSE111 were observed. Growth was monitored with the BioLector, an on-line monitoring technique for microtiter plates. Furthermore, the influence of these effects on product formation of Escherichia coli pRhotHi-2-EcFbFP was investigated. Finally, a high-throughput cultivation process was simulated with Corynebacterium glutamicum pEKEx2-phoD-GFP, beginning at the colony picking step.

resultsApplying different replication tools and methods for one single strain resulted in high time differences of growth of the slowest and fastest growing culture. The shortest time difference (0.3 h) was evaluated for the 96 cultures that were transferred with an 8-channel pipette from a thawed and mixed cryoculture and the longest time difference (6.9 h) for cultures that were transferred with a steel replicator with fixed pins from a frozen cryoculture. The on-line monitoring of a simulated high-throughput cultivation process revealed strong variances in growth kinetics and a twofold difference in product formation. Another experiment showed that varying growth kinetics, caused by varying initial biomass concentrations (OD(600) of 0.0125 to 0.2) led to strongly varying product formation upon induction at a defined point of time.

conclusionsTo improve the reproducibility of high-throughput cultivation processes and the comparability between different applied cultures, it is strongly recommended to use automated or manual liquid handling stations or, alternatively, multi-channel pipettes. Because of their higher transfer volume and hence precision in comparison to pin replicators, they reduce the variance of initial biomass concentrations. With respect to the results obtained, other methods to increase the comparability between parallel cultivations by compensating differences in biomass concentrations are required, such as using autoinduction media, fed-batch operation of precultures or on-line monitoring in microtiter plates combined with automated liquid handling.

Indexed as

Bacteriological TechniquesBiomassBioreactorsCorynebacterium glutamicumCulture MediaEscherichia coliIndustrial MicrobiologyCulture Media

Identifiers

PMID20233443
PMCPMC2847957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.