↓ Skip to main content

Alternative methods of processing bio-feedstocks in formulated consumer product design

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Chemistry, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
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.
Title
Alternative methods of processing bio-feedstocks in formulated consumer product design
Published in
Frontiers in Chemistry, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fchem.2014.00026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicolai Peremezhney, Philipp-Maximilian Jacob, Alexei Lapkin

Abstract

In this work new methods of processing bio-feedstocks in the formulated consumer products industry are discussed. Our current approach to formulated products design is based on heuristic knowledge of formulators that allows selecting individual compounds from a library of available materials with known properties. We speculate that most of the compounds (or functions) that make up the product to be designed can potentially be obtained from a few bio-sources. In this case, it may be possible to design a sequence of transformations required to convert feedstocks into products with desired properties, analogous to a metabolic pathway of a complex organism. We conceptualize some novel approaches to processing bio-feedstocks with the aim of bypassing the step of a fixed library of ingredients. Two approaches are brought forward: one making use of knowledge-based expert systems and the other making use of applications of metabolic engineering and dynamic combinatorial chemistry.

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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 25%
Professor 2 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Researcher 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 4 50%
Chemical Engineering 2 25%
Chemistry 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 May 2014.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#1,373
of 6,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,473
of 241,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,763 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 241,610 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.