Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40572910›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Application of Industrial NF and RO Membranes in Separation of Post-Fermentation Solutions: Preliminary Study.

Wirginia Tomczak, Marek Gryta, Sławomir Żak, Monika Daniluk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Wirginia TomczakFaculty of Chemical Technology and Engineering, Bydgoszcz University of Science and Technology, 3 Seminaryjna Street, 85-326 Bydgoszcz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6320-5711
Marek GrytaFaculty of Chemical Technology and Engineering, West Pomeranian University of Technology in Szczecin, ul. Pułaskiego 10, 70-322 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2714-7104
Sławomir ŻakFaculty of Chemical Technology and Engineering, Bydgoszcz University of Science and Technology, 3 Seminaryjna Street, 85-326 Bydgoszcz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7339-7112
Monika DanilukFaculty of Chemical Technology and Engineering, Bydgoszcz University of Science and Technology, 3 Seminaryjna Street, 85-326 Bydgoszcz, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The focus of this work was to perform a preliminary study on the suitability of commercially available nanofiltration (NF) and reverse osmosis (RO) membranes for the separation of 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PD) post-fermentation solutions. The experiments were conducted with the use of AFC30 and AFC99 (PCI Membrane System Inc., Milford, OH, USA) as well as BW30 membranes (Dow FilmTec Co., Midland, MI, USA) and various feed solutions: selected compounds of fermentation broths, and synthetic and real fermentation broths. Firstly, it was found that for pure water, the AFC30 membrane was characterized by the highest performance. It clearly indicated that the membrane is the most open membrane and is characterized by a more porous structure. In turn, the lowest flux was noted for the AFC99 membrane. Studies performed with the use of synthetic broth found that for the BW30 membrane, the order in which the rejection coefficient (R) was obtained was glycerol~lactic acid > 1,3-propanediol > acetic acid. It clearly confirmed that the R increased with the molecular weight (MW) of the solution compounds. With regard to ions, it was found that SO

Indexed as

biotechnologydownstream processingfermentation brothindustrial membranenanofiltrationpolymeric membraneseparation properties

Identifiers

PMID40572910
PMCPMC12194977

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.