↓ Skip to main content

Toxicological challenges to microbial bioethanol production and strategies for improved tolerance

Overview of attention for article published in Ecotoxicology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Toxicological challenges to microbial bioethanol production and strategies for improved tolerance
Published in
Ecotoxicology, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10646-015-1543-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Akinosho, Thomas Rydzak, Abhijeet Borole, Arthur Ragauskas, Dan Close

Abstract

Bioethanol production output has increased steadily over the last two decades and is now beginning to become competitive with traditional liquid transportation fuels due to advances in engineering, the identification of new production host organisms, and the development of novel biodesign strategies. A significant portion of these efforts has been dedicated to mitigating the toxicological challenges encountered across the bioethanol production process. From the release of potentially cytotoxic or inhibitory compounds from input feedstocks, through the metabolic co-synthesis of ethanol and potentially detrimental byproducts, and to the potential cytotoxicity of ethanol itself, each stage of bioethanol production requires the application of genetic or engineering controls that ensure the host organisms remain healthy and productive to meet the necessary economies required for large scale production. In addition, as production levels continue to increase, there is an escalating focus on the detoxification of the resulting waste streams to minimize their environmental impact. This review will present the major toxicological challenges encountered throughout each stage of the bioethanol production process and the commonly employed strategies for reducing or eliminating potential toxic effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Master 8 12%
Professor 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 19%
Chemical Engineering 6 9%
Engineering 4 6%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 20 29%
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 08 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,428,159
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Ecotoxicology
#834
of 1,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,225
of 274,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecotoxicology
#22
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,475 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 274,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.