↓ Skip to main content

Long-term H2 photoproduction from starch by co-culture of Clostridium butyricum and Rhodobacter sphaeroides in a repeated batch process

Overview of attention for article published in Biotechnology Techniques, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Long-term H2 photoproduction from starch by co-culture of Clostridium butyricum and Rhodobacter sphaeroides in a repeated batch process
Published in
Biotechnology Techniques, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10529-017-2486-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tatyana Laurinavichene, Kestutis Laurinavichius, Evgeny Shastik, Anatoly Tsygankov

Abstract

To prove the possibility of efficient starch photofermentation in co-culture of heterotrophic and phototrophic bacteria over prolonged period. Repeated batch photofermentation of starch was demonstrated in co-culture Clostridium butyricum and Rhodobacter sphaeroides under microaerobic conditions. It continued 15 months without addition of new inoculum or pH regulation when using 4-5 g starch l-1 and 0.04 g yeast extract l-1. The complete degradation of starch without volatile fatty acids accumulation was shown in this co-culture. The average H2 yield of 5.2 mol/mol glucose was much higher than that in Clostridium monoculture. The species composition of co-culture was studied by q-PCR assay. The concentration of Clostridium cells in prolonged co-culture was lower than in monoculture and even in a single batch co-culture. This means that Clostridia growth was significantly limited whereas starch hydrolysis still took place. The prolonged repeated batch photofermentation of starch by co-culture C. butyricum and R. sphaeroides provided efficient H2 production without accumulation of organic acids under conditions of Clostridia limitation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Professor 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Energy 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 December 2017.
All research outputs
#23,214,800
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology Techniques
#2,500
of 2,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#388,936
of 449,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology Techniques
#13
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,771 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 449,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.