2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2014.12.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microscale and miniscale fermentation and screening

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
46
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Typically, microtiter plate readers are used to determine the optimal conditions for microbial growth and lipid production because they enable many strains and culture conditions to be screened simultaneously [2022, 24, 47]. To this, the BioLector adds the ability to perform fermentation in conditions close to those of bench-top bioreactors, and, in addition, enables online fluorescence readings [2123, 46].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Typically, microtiter plate readers are used to determine the optimal conditions for microbial growth and lipid production because they enable many strains and culture conditions to be screened simultaneously [2022, 24, 47]. To this, the BioLector adds the ability to perform fermentation in conditions close to those of bench-top bioreactors, and, in addition, enables online fluorescence readings [2123, 46].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most important difference between small-scale screening and bioreactor cultivation is the ability to control the specific growth rate at values below its maximum. The gap between screening in batch culture mode (in shake flasks or deep-well plates) and the subsequently performed, labour-intensive, bioreactor culture in fedbatch mode is currently addressed by small-scale bioreactors and new feeding techniques (Barnard et al, 2010, Lattermann and Buchs, 2014, Wilming et al, 2014. Downscaled techniques of substrate addition include pump-controlled feeding (Barnard et al, 2010), release of glucose from a polymer (Hemmerich et al, 2014) or by an enzyme (PanulaPerala et al, 2008), and microfluidic systems (Grunberger et al, 2014).…”
Section: Overcoming Drawbacks Of Current Screening Conceptsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Hegab et al (2013) gave an overview of MBR fabrication techniques as well as their operation and control. Lattermann and Büchs (2015) reviewed miniaturized bioreactors and MBR development, highlighting the mass transfer and power input characterization, optical monitoring, and automation of fed-batch screening systems. Lattermann and Büchs (2015) reviewed miniaturized bioreactors and MBR development, highlighting the mass transfer and power input characterization, optical monitoring, and automation of fed-batch screening systems.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%