ArticleFungal biology and biotechnology2018
Improved microscale cultivation of
Article in Fungal biology and biotechnology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early bioprocess development using Komagataella phaffii: application scenarios for the microTOM mini bioreactor system.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Article
- Avoiding overflow metabolite formation in Komagataella phaffii fermentations to enhance recombinant protein production.Journal of biological engineering · 2024Article
- Artificial Transcription Factors for Tuneable Gene Expression inFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Parallelized microscale fed-batch cultivation in online-monitored microtiter plates: implications of media composition and feed strategies for process design and performance.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2020Article
- Extension of the yeast metabolic model to include iron metabolism and its use to estimate global levels of iron-recruiting enzyme abundance from cofactor requirements.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2019Article
- A closer look atFungal biology and biotechnology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExpanding the application of technical enzymes, e.g., in industry and agriculture, commands the acceleration and cost-reduction of bioprocess development. Microplates and shake flasks are massively employed during screenings and early phases of bioprocess development, although major drawbacks such as low oxygen transfer rates are well documented. In recent years, miniaturization and parallelization of stirred and shaken bioreactor concepts have led to the development of novel microbioreactor concepts. They combine high cultivation throughput with reproducibility and scalability, and represent promising tools for bioprocess development.
resultsParallelized microplate cultivation of the eukaryotic protein production host
conclusionThe comparison of clonal rankings under batch and fed-batch-like conditions emphasizes the necessity to perform screenings under process-relevant conditions. Increased biomass and product concentrations achieved after fed-batch microscale cultivation facilitates the selection of top producers. By reducing the demand to conduct laborious and cost-intensive lab-scale bioreactor cultivations during process development, this study will contribute to an accelerated development of protein production 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.