↓ Skip to main content

Microbial co-culturing systems: butanol production from organic wastes through consolidated bioprocessing

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Microbial co-culturing systems: butanol production from organic wastes through consolidated bioprocessing
Published in
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00253-018-8970-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yujia Jiang, Ting Zhang, Jiasheng Lu, Peter Dürre, Wenming Zhang, Weiliang Dong, Jie Zhou, Min Jiang, Fengxue Xin

Abstract

Biobutanol can be indigenously synthesized by solventogenic Clostridium species; however, these microorganisms possess inferior capability of utilizing abundant and renewable organic wastes, such as starch, lignocellulose, and even syngas. The common strategy to achieve direct butanol production from these organic wastes is through genetic modification of wild-type strains. However, due to the complex of butanol synthetic and hydrolytic enzymes expression systems, the recombinants show unsatisfactory results. Recently, setting up microbial co-culturing systems became more attractive, as they could not only perform more complicated tasks, but also endure changeable environments. Hence, this mini-review comprehensively summarized the state-of-the-art biobutanol production from different substrates by using microbial co-culturing systems. Furthermore, strategies regarding establishment principles of microbial co-culturing systems were also analyzed and compared.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 19 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 20%
Chemical Engineering 8 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 12%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 21 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 12 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,034,552
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#964
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,908
of 332,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#17
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 332,026 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.