Growth and fermentation patterns of Saccharomyces cerevisiae under different ammonium concentrations and its implications in winemaking industry

To study the effects of assimilable nitrogen concentration on growth profile and on fermentation kinetics of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Aims: To study the effects of assimilable nitrogen concentration on growth profile and on fermentation kinetics of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Methods and Results: Saccharomyces cerevisiae was grown in batch in a defined medium with glucose (200 g l−1) as the only carbon and energy source, and nitrogen supplied as ammonium sulphate or phosphate forms under different concentrations. The initial nitrogen concentration in the media had no effect on specific growth rates of the yeast strain PYCC 4072. However, fermentation rate and the time required for completion of the alcoholic fermentation were strongly dependent on nitrogen availability. At the stationary phase, the addition of ammonium was effective in increasing cell population, fermentation rate and ethanol. Conclusions: The yeast strain required a minimum of 267 mg N l−1 to attain complete dryness of media, within the time considered for the experiments. Lower levels were enough to support growth, although leading to sluggish or stuck fermentation. Significance and Impact of the Study: The findings reported here contribute to elucidate the role of nitrogen on growth and fermentation performance of wine yeast. This information might be useful to the wine industry where excessive addition of nitrogen to prevent sluggish or stuck fermentation might have a negative impact on wine stability and quality

Knowledge dating and knowledge sharing in ad-hoc transient communities

This chapter will focus on the question of what rules and policies are conducive to the emergence of an adequate support infrastructure in the non-formal settings of a Learning Network. Once such an infrastructure is in place, a variety of ways again embedded in rules and policies may be used to guarantee its continued exis-tence. This was the subject of the previous chapter. Here the focus is on the phase of the emergence of social interaction and the formation of an incipient social in-frastructure. It is in this stage that the lone learner makes acquaintance with his or her online peers. More specifically, since learning through the exchange of knowl-edge is the ultimate objective of any Learning Network, we will present guidelines for effective and efficient knowledge dating in Learning Networks; ultimately, this should lead to knowledge sharing. During our discussion, we will introduce the notion of ad-hoc transient communities, temporal online gatherings of people fo-cused on a particular issue, which precisely because of their focus and transience help build a social infrastructure in a Learning Network. Ad-hoc transient com-munities may be seen as a knowledge dating and sharing service, offered in the context of a Learning Network

RELICS: Strong Lens Models for Five Galaxy Clusters from the Reionization Lensing Cluster Survey

Large scale structure and cosmolog

Supporting Spartina: Interdisciplinary perspective shows Spartina as a distinct solid genus

In 2014, a DNA-based phylogenetic study confirming the paraphyly of the grass subtribe Sporobolinae proposed the creation of a large monophyletic genus Sporobolus, including (among others) species previously included in the genera Spartina, Calamovilfa, and Sporobolus. Spartina species have contributed substantially (and continue contributing) to our knowledge in multiple disciplines, including ecology, evolutionary biology, molecular biology, biogeography, experimental ecology, biological invasions, environmental management, restoration ecology, history, economics, and sociology. There is no rationale so compelling to subsume the name Spartina as a subgenus that could rival the striking, global iconic history and use of the name Spartina for over 200 yr. We do not agree with the subjective arguments underlying the proposal to change Spartina to Sporobolus. We understand the importance of both the objective phylogenetic insights and of the subjective formalized nomenclature and hope that by opening this debate we will encourage positive feedback that will strengthen taxonomic decisions with an interdisciplinary perspective. We consider that the strongly distinct, monophyletic clade Spartina should simply and efficiently be treated as the genus Spartina