Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31218375›Full record

ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2019

The filamentous fungus Penicillium chrysogenum analysed via flow cytometry-a fast and statistically sound insight into morphology and viability.

Lukas Veiter, Christoph Herwig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

2 authors.

Lukas VeiterCD Laboratory on Mechanistic and Physiological Methods for Improved Bioprocesses, Vienna University of Technology, Gumpendorferstrasse 1a/166, 1060, Vienna, Austria.
Christoph HerwigCD Laboratory on Mechanistic and Physiological Methods for Improved Bioprocesses, Vienna University of Technology, Gumpendorferstrasse 1a/166, 1060, Vienna, Austria. christoph.herwig@tuwien.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Filamentous fungi serve as production host for a number of highly relevant biotechnological products, like penicillin. In submerged culture, morphology can be exceptionally diverse and is influenced by several process parameters, like aeration, agitation, medium composition or growth rate. Fungal growth leads to several morphological classes encompassing homogeneously dispersed hyphae and various forms of hyphal agglomerates and/or clump structures. Eventually, the so-called pellet structure can be formed, which represents a hyphal agglomerate with a dense core. Pellet structures can hinder oxygen and substrate transport, resulting in different states of viability, which in turn affects productivity and process control. Over the years, several publications have dealt with methods to either gain morphological insight into pellet structure or determine biomass viability. Within this contribution, we present a way to combine both in a flow cytometry-based method employing fluorescent staining. Thereby, we can assess filamentous biomass in a statistically sound way according to (i) morphology and (ii) viability of each detected morphological form. We are confident that this method can shed light on the complex relationship between fungal morphology, viability and productivity-in both process development and routine manufacturing processes.

Indexed as

Microbial ViabilityFlow CytometryFluorescenceHyphaePenicillium chrysogenumStaining and LabelingFilamentous fungiFlow cytometryMorphologyPelletsPenicillium chrysogenumViability

Identifiers

PMID31218375
PMCPMC6667401

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.