You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Production of bacterial cellulose by Gluconacetobacter hansenii CGMCC 3917 using only waste beer yeast as nutrient source
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bioresource Technology, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.biortech.2013.10.052 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dehui Lin, Patricia Lopez-Sanchez, Rui Li, Zhixi Li |
| Abstract |
In order to improve the use of waste beer yeast (WBY) for bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter hansenii CGMCC 3917, a two-step pre-treatment was designed. First WBY was treated by 4 methods: 0.1M NaOH treatment, high speed homogenizer, ultrasonication and microwave treatment followed by hydrolysis (121°C, 20 min) under mild acid condition (pH 2). The optimal pre-treatment conditions were evaluated by the reducing sugar yield after hydrolysis. 15% WBY treated by ultrasonication for 40 min had the highest reducing sugar yield (29.19%), followed by NaOH treatment (28.98%), high speed homogenizer (13.33%) and microwaves (13.01%). Treated WBY hydrolysates were directly supplied as only nutrient source for BC production. A sugar concentration of 3% WBY hydrolysates treated by ultrasonication gave the highest BC yield (7.02 g/L), almost 6 times as that from untreated WBY (1.21 g/L). Furthermore, the properties of the BC were as good as those obtained from the conventional chemical media. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 266 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 14% |
| Researcher | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 17% |
| Unknown | 71 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 36 | 13% |
| Engineering | 33 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 18 | 7% |
| Chemical Engineering | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 43 | 16% |
| Unknown | 94 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2021.
All research outputs
#5,339,559
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Bioresource Technology
#954
of 8,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,754
of 224,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioresource Technology
#14
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,264 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,524 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.