Cited by 52Spaceflight effects on biologyFluid Dynamics and MixingFungal and yeast genetics research

Cultivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a bioreactor in microgravity

Walther, I., Bechler, B., Müller, O., Hunzinger, E., Cogoli, A.·1996·Journal of Biotechnology

Abstract

Yeast cells were cultured for 8 d in a newly developed bioreactor during the Spacelab IML-2 mission. Two bioreactors, one stirred and one without stirring, were installed in the Biorack facility in space. Two control units were installed in the Biorack module at the Kennedy Space Center. Samples were drawn on mission day 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and preserved either by freezing or chemically fixed for post-flight analysis. The values of pH, pH regulation, temperature and redox potential were transmitted on-line to the ground station throughout the mission. The performance of the bioreactor was satisfactory except for a partial failure of the medium micropump. Despite the failure of the pump, the data support the following conclusions: There is a significant difference in the distribution of the bud scars between cells cultured at 0 x g and at 1 x g. The percentage of randomly distributed bud scars was significantly higher in the flight (17%) than in the ground control cells (5%). No remarkable differences were noted in the cell cycle, ultrastructure, cell proliferation, cell volume, ethanol production and glucose consumption.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0168-1656(96)01375-2

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Walther, I., Bechler, B., Müller, O., Hunzinger, E., & Cogoli, A.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Walther, I.
Venue
Journal of Biotechnology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-06
Volume
47
Issue
2-3
Pages
113-127
ISSN
0168-1656 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059202059
Cited by
52
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Spaceflight effects on biology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
Keywords
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, microgravity, bioreactors, yeast culture, bud scars, cell cycle, ethanol production, glucose utilization, cell proliferation, cell volume, ultrastructure, redox potential, pH control
MeSH terms
Biotechnology, Cell Cycle, Equipment Failure, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Microscopy, Electron, Oxidation-Reduction, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Space Flight, Weightlessness, Bioreactors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review