ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2017
Generic Protocol for Optimization of Heterologous Protein Production Using Automated Microbioreactor Technology.
Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-throughput process development from gene cloning to protein production.Microbial cell factories · 2023Review
- Predictive approaches to guide the expression of recombinant vaccine targets in Escherichia coli: a case study presentation utilising Absynth Biologics Ltd. proprietary Clostridium difficile vaccine antigens.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Two Simple Methods for Optimizing the Production of "Difficult-to-Express" GnRH-DFF40 Chimeric Protein.Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin · 2019Article
- Elucidation of auxotrophic deficiencies of Bacillus pumilus DSM 18097 to develop a defined minimal medium.Microbial cell factories · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A core business in industrial biotechnology using microbial production cell factories is the iterative process of strain engineering and optimization of bioprocess conditions. One important aspect is the improvement of cultivation medium to provide an optimal environment for microbial formation of the product of interest. It is well accepted that the media composition can dramatically influence overall bioprocess performance. Nutrition medium optimization is known to improve recombinant protein production with microbial systems and thus, this is a rewarding step in bioprocess development. However, very often standard media recipes are taken from literature, since tailor-made design of the cultivation medium is a tedious task that demands microbioreactor technology for sufficient cultivation throughput, fast product analytics, as well as support by lab robotics to enable reliability in liquid handling steps. Furthermore, advanced mathematical methods are required for rationally analyzing measurement data and efficiently designing parallel experiments such as to achieve optimal information content. The generic nature of the presented protocol allows for easy adaption to different lab equipment, other expression hosts, and target proteins of interest, as well as further bioprocess parameters. Moreover, other optimization objectives like protein production rate, specific yield, or product quality can be chosen to fit the scope of other optimization studies. The applied Kriging Toolbox (KriKit) is a general tool for Design of Experiments (DOE) that contributes to improved holistic bioprocess optimization. It also supports multi-objective optimization which can be important in optimizing both upstream and downstream processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.