Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34751156›Full record

ArticleBioresource technology2022

Process optimisation for production and recovery of succinic acid using xylose-rich hydrolysates by Actinobacillus succinogenes.

Esther Oreoluwa Jokodola, Vivek Narisetty, Eulogio Castro, Sumit Durgapal, Frederic Coulon, Raveendran Sindhu, Parameswaran Binod, J Rajesh Banu, Gopalakrishnan Kumar, Vinod Kumar

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioresource technology, 2022. 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
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Formate-driven in situ COBiotechnology for biofuels and bioproducts · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evolution-assisted engineering ofBiodesign research · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Development of Hypertolerant Strain ofACS sustainable chemistry & engineering · 2022
    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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Esther Oreoluwa JokodolaSchool of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK.
Vivek NarisettySchool of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK.
Eulogio CastroDepartment of Chemical, Environmental and Materials Engineering, Universidad de Jaén, Campus Las Lagunillas, 23071 Jaén, Spain.
Sumit DurgapalDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumaun University, Bhimtal, Nainital 263136, Uttarakhand, India.
Frederic CoulonSchool of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK.
Raveendran SindhuMicrobial Processes and Technology Division, CSIR-National Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology (CSIR-NIIST), Thiruvananthapuram 695 019, Kerala, India.
Parameswaran BinodMicrobial Processes and Technology Division, CSIR-National Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology (CSIR-NIIST), Thiruvananthapuram 695 019, Kerala, India.
J Rajesh BanuDepartment of Life Sciences, Central University of Tamil Nadu, Neelakudi, Thiruvarur, Tamil Nadu 610005, India.
Gopalakrishnan KumarSchool of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Republic of Korea.
Vinod KumarSchool of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK. Electronic address: Vinod.Kumar@cranfield.ac.uk.
Cranfield University · GBNational Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology · INCentral University of Tamil Nadu · INKumaun University · INUniversidad de Jaén · ESYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Succinic acid (SA) is a top platform chemical obtainable from biomass. The current study evaluated the potential of Actinobacillus succinogenes for SA production using xylose-rich hemicellulosic fractions of two important lignocellulosic feedstocks, olive pits (OP) and sugarcane bagasse (SCB) and the results were compared with pure xylose. Initial experiments were conducted in shake flask followed by batch and fed-batch cultivation in bioreactor. Further separation of SA from the fermented broth was carried out by adapting direct crystallisation method. During fed-batch culture, maximum SA titers of 36.7, 33.6, and 28.7 g/L was achieved on pure xylose, OP and SCB hydrolysates, respectively, with same conversion yield of 0.27 g/g. The recovery yield of SA accumulated on pure xylose, OP and SCB hydrolysates was 79.1, 76.5, and 75.2%, respectively. The results obtained are of substantial value and pave the way for development of sustainable SA biomanufacturing in an integrated biorefinery.

Indexed as

ActinobacillusSuccinic AcidFermentationXyloseSuccinic AcidXyloseActinobacillus succinogenesDownstream processingOlive pitsSuccinic acidSugarcane bagasse, Pure xylose

Identifiers

PMID34751156
PMCPMC8683751
OpenAlexW3209759372

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.