Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38796486›Full record

ReviewBiotechnology for biofuels and bioproducts2024

Simultaneous fermentation and enzymatic biocatalysis-a useful process option?

Katharina Oehlenschläger, Emily Schepp, Judith Stiefelmaier, Dirk Holtmann, Roland Ulber

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biotechnology for biofuels and bioproducts, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Katharina OehlenschlägerInstitute of Bioprocess Engineering, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau, Gottlieb-Daimler-Straße 49, 67663, Kaiserslautern, Germany.
Emily ScheppInstitute of Process Engineering in Life Sciences, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Kaiserstraße 12, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Judith StiefelmaierInstitute of Bioprocess Engineering, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau, Gottlieb-Daimler-Straße 49, 67663, Kaiserslautern, Germany.
Dirk HoltmannInstitute of Process Engineering in Life Sciences, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Kaiserstraße 12, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Roland UlberInstitute of Bioprocess Engineering, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau, Gottlieb-Daimler-Straße 49, 67663, Kaiserslautern, Germany. roland.ulber@mv.rptu.de.

Funding

DFG; Deutsche Foschungsgemeinschaft 506712131
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biotransformation with enzymes and de novo syntheses with whole-cell biocatalysts each have specific advantages. These can be combined to achieve processes with optimal performance. A recent approach is to perform bioconversion processes and enzymatic catalysis simultaneously in one-pot. This is a well-established process in the biorefinery, where starchy or cellulosic material is degraded enzymatically and simultaneously used as substrate for microbial cultivations. This procedure leads to a number of advantages like saving in time but also in the needed equipment (e.g., reaction vessels). In addition, the inhibition or side-reaction of high sugar concentrations can be overcome by combining the processes. These benefits of coupling microbial conversion and enzymatic biotransformation can also be transferred to other processes for example in the sector of biofuel production or in the food industry. However, finding a compromise between the different requirements of the two processes is challenging in some cases. This article summarises the latest developments and process variations.

Indexed as

BiofuelButyl butyrateCoupling fermentation and enzymatic biocatalysisEnzymatic biocatalysisEnzymatic esterificationSimultaneous saccharification and fermentation

Identifiers

PMID38796486
PMCPMC11128117

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.