Sodium Bicarbonate as Inorganic Carbon Source for Higher Biomass and Lipid Production Integrated Carbon Capture in Chlorella vulgaris
Open accessAbstract
Chlorella vulgaris was isolated from sewerage treatment plant and grown in the presence of sodium bicarbonate as carbon source at 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 g L− 1. Highest specific growth rate (0.653 μ d− 1) was obtained with 1 g L− 1 bicarbonate followed by 0.5 g L− 1 (0.641 d− 1) on 15th day culturing. Total chlorophyll content of microalgae has increased in a dose dependent fashion with bicarbonate addition and maximum level recorded in 1 g L− 1 (0.769 ± 0.09 g L− 1). The biomass productivity was in the range of 0.237–0.996 g d− 1 L− 1. Rate of CO2 fixation and carbon content, in terms of quantity was estimated. Results showed that at 1 g L− 1 sodium bicarbonate concentration, maximum CO2 fixation (0.497 g/dry weight) and carbon content (0.69 g mL− 1 day− 1) was found. Biomass concentration was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in cultures (1.54 g L− 1) supplemented with 1 g L− 1 bicarbonate whereas there was no much difference in cellular lipid concentration (16 mg mL− 1). GC–MS analysis of fatty acids showed highest amounts of palmitic acid, myristic and stearic acid. In summary, the addition of sodium bicarbonate increases cellular abundance, chlorophyll content and to some extent in the case of lipid content in C. vulgaris integrated with CO2 sequestration.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The growth rate is not linearly related to the NaHCO3 content.
“Mokashi et al. [58] reveal that the growth rate is not linearly related to the NaHCO3 content.”
The typical size of Spirulina appears bigger on a cellular scale due to its helical shape (8~9 μm in diameter and 100~200 μm in trichome length), compared with other species such as the spherical Chlorella cells (2~10 μm).
“The typical size of Spirulina appears bigger on a cellular scale due to its helical shape (8~9 µm in diameter and 100~200 µm in trichome length [50]), comparing to other species such as the spherical Chlorella cells (2~10 µm [58]).”
From A Microalgae Photobioreactor System for Indoor Air Remediation: Empirical Examination of the CO2 Absorption Performance of Spirulina maxima in a NaHCO3-Reduced Medium (2023) · cites this paper as [58]
The Sample Collection and Identification section identifies the organism as Chlorella, but does not describe its shape or cell diameter. Searches for spherical cells, cell size, and the claimed 2–10 µm range found no passage in our copy supporting the part attached to citation [58]. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The effect of light, salinity, and nitrogen availability on lipid production by Nannochloropsis sp.
Pal, D., Khozin-Goldberg, I., Cohen, Z., & Boussiba, S. (2011) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-011-3170-1 · Cited by 575 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Anderson, R.A. (Ed.), 2005. Algal Culturing Techniques. Elsevier Inc., USA.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hanifzadeh, M., Sarrafzadeh, M.-H., Nabati, Z., Tavakoli, O., & Feyzizarnagh, H. (2018) · Journal of environmental chemical engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2018.01.008 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Han, M., Park, J., Kim, I., & Yi, H. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app132412991 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mokashi, K., Shetty, V., George, S. A., & Sibi, G.
- Corresponding author
- Sibi, G.
- ORCID
- Sibi, G.
- Venue
- Achievements in the Life Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-06
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 111-117
- ISSN
- 2078-1520 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2425756189
- Cited by
- 86
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 2.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Achievements in the Life Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Karnataka State Biofuel Development Board
- Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology (38S_B_MSc_015)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
- Keywords
- Chlorella vulgaris, sodium bicarbonate, inorganic carbon source, microalgae cultivation, lipid production, CO2 sequestration, CO2 capture, chlorophyll content, fatty acid composition, palmitic acid, myristic acid, stearic acid, CO2 fixation
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