ReviewEngineering in life sciences2019
Same but different-Scale up and numbering up in electrobiotechnology and photobiotechnology.
Review in Engineering in life sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in Scaling up Bioelectrochemical Systems: A Review.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2025Review
- Exploitation of Biodiversity in Bioeconomy: Examples, Opportunities, and Challenges.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2025Review
- Novel synthetic co-culture ofEngineering in life sciences · 2023Article
- Empower C1: Combination of Electrochemistry and Biology to Convert C1 Compounds.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2022Article
- Implementation of kMarine drugs · 2021Article
- Response-Surface-Optimized and Scaled-Up Microbial Electrosynthesis of Chiral Alcohols.ChemSusChem · 2020Article
- Same but different-Scale up and numbering up in electrobiotechnology and photobiotechnology.Engineering in life sciences · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Facing energy problems, there is a strong demand for new technologies dealing with the replacement of fossil fuels. The emerging fields of biotechnology, photobiotechnology and electrobiotechnology, offer solutions for the production of fuels, energy, or chemicals using renewable energy sources (light or electrical current e.g. produced by wind or solar power) or organic (waste) substrates. From an engineering point of view both technologies have analogies and some similar challenges, since both light and electron transfer are primarily surface-dependent. In contrast to that, bioproduction processes are typically volume dependent. To allow large scale and industrially relevant applications of photobiotechnology and electrobiotechnology, this opinion first gives an overview over the current scales reached in these areas. We then try to point out the challenges and possible methods for the scale up or numbering up of the reactors used. It is shown that the field of photobiotechnology is by now much more advanced than electrobiotechnology and has achieved industrial applications in some cases. We argue that transferring knowledge from photobiotechnology to electrobiotechnology can speed up the development of the emerging field of electrobiotechnology. We believe that a combination of scale up and numbering up, as it has been shown for several photobiotechnological reactors, may well lead to industrially relevant scales in electrobiotechnological processes allowing an industrial application of the technology in near future.
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.