ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Elucidation of the growth phenotypes of 82 strains from the
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Microbial growth phenotype is commonly summarised by a small set of parameters: specific growth rate, lag phase duration, maximum cell density, and growth curve profile; yet even within a single genus these characteristics can vary substantially across species, with direct consequences for how growth performance is interpreted and compared. This challenge is particularly pertinent for the largely uncharacterised Methods: In this work, the growth phenotypes of 82 Results: Maximum specific growth rates ranged from 0.05 ± 0.03 to 1.14 ± 0.34 h Discussion: This analyst-dependent variation has broad implications beyond strain characterisation: analyst interpretation directly affects reported growth rates, which serve as key inputs and constraints in metabolic modelling and upstream bioprocess design. The reliability of both primary literature and secondary computational analyses built upon these data is therefore directly affected by analyst-specific decisions, a problem further compounded for poorly characterised organisms, whose growth parameters are often borrowed from related species in the absence of species-specific data, introducing a largely unacknowledged source of uncertainty. This foundational phenotypic dataset highlights an urgent need for standardised, generalisable frameworks for growth parameter determination, particularly for non-model organisms.
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.