Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Review Topical Sections

Next-generation sequencing approaches for improvement of lactic acid bacteria-fermented plant-based beverages

  • Received: 21 November 2016 Accepted: 12 January 2017 Published: 17 January 2017
  • Plant-based beverages and milk alternatives produced from cereals and legumes have grown in popularity in recent years due to a range of consumer concerns over dairy products. These plant-based products can often have undesirable physiochemical properties related to flavour, texture, and nutrient availability and/or deficiencies. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) fermentation offers potential remediation for many of these issues, and allows consumers to retain their perception of the resultant products as natural and additive-free. Using next-generation sequencing (NGS) or omics approaches to characterize LAB isolates to find those that will improve properties of plant-based beverages is the most direct way to product improvement. Although NGS/omics approaches have been extensively used for selection of LAB for use in the dairy industry, a comparable effort has not occurred for selecting LAB for fermenting plant raw substrates, save those used in producing wine and certain types of beer. Here we review the few and recent applications of NGS/omics to profile and improve LAB fermentation of various plant-based substrates for beverage production. We also identify specific issues in the production of various LAB fermented plant-based beverages that such NGS/omics applications have the power to resolve.

    Citation: Jordyn Bergsveinson, Ilkka Kajala, Barry Ziola. Next-generation sequencing approaches for improvement of lactic acid bacteria-fermented plant-based beverages[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(1): 8-24. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.1.8

    Related Papers:

    [1] Kalomoira Zisopoulou, Dionysia Panagoulia . Solar Power: A new mathematical definition and theoretical proof it is a Green Public Good. Green Finance, 2019, 1(3): 312-327. doi: 10.3934/GF.2019.3.312
    [2] Clement Allan Tisdell . Renewable energy use and the renewable energy sector’s development: public finance, environmental externalities and sustainability. Green Finance, 2019, 1(2): 156-173. doi: 10.3934/GF.2019.2.156
    [3] Reinhard Haas, Amela Ajanovic, Jasmine Ramsebner, Theresia Perger, Jaroslav Knápek, Jan W. Bleyl . Financing the future infrastructure of sustainable energy systems. Green Finance, 2021, 3(1): 90-118. doi: 10.3934/GF.2021006
    [4] Alexander Ryota Keeley, Shunsuke Managi . The importance of financial cost for renewable energy projects: economic viability assessment of renewable hybrid mini-grid systems in Indonesia. Green Finance, 2019, 1(2): 139-155. doi: 10.3934/GF.2019.2.139
    [5] Neha Saxena, Jitendra Kumar, Shib Sankar Sana . Sustainable production model with stochastic machine breakdown using smart manufacturing under circular economy. Green Finance, 2023, 5(4): 479-511. doi: 10.3934/GF.2023019
    [6] Wen-Tien Tsai . Green finance for mitigating greenhouse gases and promoting renewable energy development: Case study in Taiwan. Green Finance, 2024, 6(2): 249-264. doi: 10.3934/GF.2024010
    [7] Cristina Ballester, Dolores Furió . Analysing the impact of renewables on Iberian wholesale electricity market prices using machine learning techniques. Green Finance, 2024, 6(2): 363-382. doi: 10.3934/GF.2024014
    [8] Phoebe Grace Saculsan, Takashi Kanamura . Examining risk and return profiles of renewable energy investment in developing countries: the case of the Philippines. Green Finance, 2020, 2(2): 135-150. doi: 10.3934/GF.2020008
    [9] Pekka Tuominen, Francesco Reda, Waled Dawoud, Bahaa Elboshy, Ghada Elshafei, Abdelazim Negm . A cost-effectiveness assessment method and tool for assessing energy efficiency improvements in buildings. Green Finance, 2019, 1(1): 67-81. doi: 10.3934/GF.2019.1.67
    [10] Yoram Krozer . Financing of the global shift to renewable energy and energy efficiency. Green Finance, 2019, 1(3): 264-278. doi: 10.3934/GF.2019.3.264
  • Plant-based beverages and milk alternatives produced from cereals and legumes have grown in popularity in recent years due to a range of consumer concerns over dairy products. These plant-based products can often have undesirable physiochemical properties related to flavour, texture, and nutrient availability and/or deficiencies. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) fermentation offers potential remediation for many of these issues, and allows consumers to retain their perception of the resultant products as natural and additive-free. Using next-generation sequencing (NGS) or omics approaches to characterize LAB isolates to find those that will improve properties of plant-based beverages is the most direct way to product improvement. Although NGS/omics approaches have been extensively used for selection of LAB for use in the dairy industry, a comparable effort has not occurred for selecting LAB for fermenting plant raw substrates, save those used in producing wine and certain types of beer. Here we review the few and recent applications of NGS/omics to profile and improve LAB fermentation of various plant-based substrates for beverage production. We also identify specific issues in the production of various LAB fermented plant-based beverages that such NGS/omics applications have the power to resolve.


    It has recently been demonstrated that renewable energy is a viable alternative to fossil fuels in solving environmental problems and the energy crisis caused by conventional fuel use (Ashouri et al., 2015). This makes the use of renewable resources, such as solar energy, essential to promoting human sustainability and alleviating environmental concerns. One of the most effective measures to combat global warming has been the development of solar energy utilization. This type of energy, particularly in areas with higher average radiation levels, can reduce the consumption of fossil-based energy. As a result of new policies and government subsidies, the cost of utilizing solar energy has decreased, and installed capacity has increased. However, the proportion of this type of energy is still less than 3.6% despite all these worldwide initiatives (Pourasl et al., 2023). As a result of climate change, it appears that an increase in the proportion of solar energy is impossible unless government policies are changed in a paradigmatic manner.

    Solar energy is a low-emission technology with a high potential for scaling up. It is therefore inevitable and necessary to increase the capacity of solar electricity to scales of terawatts in order to combat climate change. During the past few years, solar generation capacity has increased significantly, technology has improved, prices have decreased, and innovative business models have been developed to encourage the purchase of residential solar panels. However, further improvements are required in order to increase the share of solar energy at a price that is acceptable to society. Solar energy will only be able to fulfill this role if it is cost-competitive and cost-effective compared to fossil fuels, if carbon dioxide emissions are appropriately penalized, and if subsidies are likely to be significantly reduced (Sultan et al., 2020). Any new technology must be able to compete with existing commercially available technologies (Nguyen et al., 2023; Omidkar, Alagumalai, et al., 2024; Omidkar, Haddadian, et al., 2024; Omidkar et al., 2023). It has been proven that concentrated solar power (CSP) is an efficient technology for the production of clean and renewable energy. In essence, it works via focusing the sun's rays by using a reflective surface. There are two types of CSP systems: point focused and line focused. Parabolic dish collectors and solar towers are two types of point-focused collectors. There are two types of line-focused collectors: parabolic trough collectors (PTCs) and linear Fresnel reflectors (LFRs). Focus temperatures can reach over 1000 ℃ when using point-focused CSPs. At temperatures below 500 ℃, line-focused CSP systems produce thermal and electrical energy (Cuce & Cuce, 2023; Cuce et al., 2021). PTC technology is widely regarded as the preferred CSP technology. As a stand-alone system, it can also be combined with other power generation systems to create hybrid systems. The nominal power produced by solar collectors directly correlates with radiation, so the determination of the geographical location is crucial. Furthermore, the average of sunny hours, wind speed, and humidity affect the performance of solar collectors. On the other hand, the performance of solar collectors can be described by the exergy conception, which means the maximum theoretical work obtainable from a given thermodynamic state when this reaches thermo-mechanical and chemical equilibrium with a reference state on environmental conditions entering a state called "dead state" (García-García et al., 2019). Cuse et al. designed a hybrid PTC/TEG energy system created with a thermoelectric generator (TEG) energy system (Cuce et al., 2024). They concluded that the overall thermal efficiency of PTC-TEG hybrid systems can be increased by 70% compared to PTC systems.

    Elfeky and Wang (Elfeky & Wang, 2023) conducted techno-environ-economic assessment of two energy generation technologies, photovoltaic and CSP, in China and Egypt. According to their findings, establishing photovoltaic power plants in China is the best option, but concentrating on solar power plants in Egypt is the best option. The results show that in optimal conditions, a parabolic trough collector (PTC), which concentrates sunlight, produces 33.34% more electricity than a photovoltaic plant. Deai et al. introduced a PTC solar system using a micro-structured polymer foil. This system generates electricity through an organic Rankine cycle and produces freshwater using a multi-effect distillation process (Desai et al., 2021). The proposed system holds significant potential for regions facing electricity and water shortages. Using cyclopentane as the working fluid for the organic Rankine cycle, the plant achieved a levelized electricity cost of 0.116 EUR/kWhe and a levelized water cost of 1.13 EUR/m3 for Antofagasta, Chile, and 0.163 EUR/kWhe and 1.62 EUR/m3 for Cape Town, South Africa. Gilani and Hoseinzadeh conducted a comparative techno-economic analysis of compound parabolic collectors (CPC) in which all incident radiation is focused onto a receiver in solar water heating systems in the northern hemisphere (Azad Gilani & Hoseinzadeh, 2021). As a result of the study, CPCs are found to consume less auxiliary power in all selected locations than flat plate collectors. In all research conducted so far, optimizing design parameters, operational conditions, and input variables has remained a major challenge. Energy system efficiency can be affected by factors such as operational conditions, material properties, kind of collector and operating fluid, concentrating geometry, and cycle system (Mehdipour et al., 2020; Pal & K, 2021; Shafieian et al., 2020; Tabarhoseini et al., 2022). Myriads of studies have thus been conducted to determine the thermodynamic behavior of these systems using calculational models and predictive technologies like machine learning, specifically artificial neural networks (ANN) (Alawi, Kamar, Salih, et al., 2024; Brenner et al., 2023; Kottala et al., 2023; Mustafa et al., 2022; Ruiz-Moreno et al., 2022; Vakili & Salehi, 2023). Experiments in pilot plants are ineffective due to their high operational costs and time requirements. Neural network simulators offer the advantages of simplicity, speed, and the ability to handle nonlinear and complex interactions between inputs and variables, making them a promising solution for complex data analyses. (Haykin, 1998). A common method of solving multi-objective optimization problems (MOPs) is to use evolutionary algorithms (EAs), such as genetic algorithms and particle swarm algorithms. Following the development of swarm intelligence (SI) algorithms, particle swarm algorithms expanded into multi-objective particle swarm optimization algorithms (MOSPO). A number of studies have attempted to utilize ANNs in addition to other concepts for evaluating renewable energy systems; however, the number of studies is limited. Recently, there has been a surge in interest in employing artificial intelligence techniques to optimize and predict renewable energy production systems (Elsheikh et al., 2024; Shboul et al., 2024; Shboul et al., 2024; Zayed et al., 2023a; Zayed et al., 2023b; Zayed et al., 2021). Other challenges include high CPU usage, optimization, and interpretation. The knowledge gap that motivated this study is illustrated in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Illustration of the knowledge gap and comparison of this study with the literature review. * means that the study contains the feature; – means that the study lacks the feature.
    Ref. and year Method MI optimization TEA LCA Applicability of other problems
    (Salari et al., 2024), 2024 Heat transfer * - - -
    (Alawi, Kamar, Abdelrazek, et al., 2024), 2024 Heat transfer * - - -
    (Wu et al., 2022) Linear regression * - - -
    (Wang et al., 2021), 2021 ANN * - - -
    This study Thermodynamic and heat transfer * * * *

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To overcome these challenges and to be useful in industrial settings, a supervised machine-learning approach has been developed in this study. The purpose of this study is to optimize energy, exergy, heat cost, and carbon dioxide emission costs for a complex renewable energy system using a machine-learning approach.

    The system used in this study is depicted in Figure 1. The components of the parabolic trough solar collector are a parabolic collector, pump, storage tank or thermal heat exchanger, flow transducer, DC motor, piping, working fluid, pressure and temperature sensors, CPU, and data storage. Through an absorb tube, the working fluid receives heat and enters the storage tank at a high temperature. Energy from the storage tank can be used simultaneously or whenever needed. It is also possible to use the storage tank to supply the energy of another working fluid via a heat exchanger for other applications such as the Rankine cycle, absorption refrigeration cycle, or the supply of hot water for residential use. CPUs can utilize the thermal and hydrodynamic properties of working fluids and receive atmospheric conditions from sensors. The system can also be optimized by using the aforementioned parameters, the mass flow of the working fluid, and the angle of the reflector.

    Figure 1.  Schematic view of the parabolic trough solar collector system.

    The difference between solar time and local time can be derived via Equation (1) (Duffie et al., 2020).

    TstTlt=4×(LlocLst)+E (1)
    E=229.2×(0.000075+0.001868Cosβ0.032077Sinβ0.014615Cos2β0.04089Sin2β) (2)

    In Equation (2), the β=360(n1)365 and the n is the nth day of the year.

    The angle of sunset can be calculated using Equation (3), in which φ and δ are the latitude and deviation angle, respectively (Duffie et al., 2020).

    ω=Cos1(tanφ×tanδ) (3)
    δ=23.45sin(360(284+n)365) (4)

    The pressure drop inside the absorber tube can be calculated by Equation (5).

    ΔP=fDarcyV21L2gD2 (5)
    V1=4˙mρπD22 (6)

    In Equations (5) and (6), ΔP is pressure loss along the length of L in the pipe, D2 is the inner diameter of the absorber pipe, g is the gravitational acceleration, V1 is the average velocity of fluid inside the pipe, ˙m is mass flow, and ρ is the density of the fluid. Depending on the laminar or turbulent flow regime, fDarcy can be derived using Equations (7) or (8), in which f is the friction factor and ε is the pipe's effective roughness height.

    Laminar flow: fDarcy=64ReD2 (7)
    Turbulent flow: f=fDarcy41f=2log(εD23.7+2.51ReD2f) (8)

    Based on Figure 2, the energy balance in one element of the tube in which the temperature gradient is linear can be established using the system of Equations (9–13).

    ˙q12,conv=˙mc(ToutletTinlet) (9)
    ˙q12,conv=˙q23,cond (10)
    ˙q3,SolAbs=˙q34,conv+˙q34,rad+˙q23,cond+˙qcond,bracket (11)
    ˙q34,conv+˙q34,rad=˙q45,cond (12)
    ˙q45,cond+˙q5,Soldos=˙q56,conv+˙q57,rad (13)
    Figure 2.  Heat flux in one element of the parabolic trough solar collector. q1-2, conv: convection heat transfer between the inner surface of the absorber tube and working fluid. q2-3, cond: conduction heat transfer between the outer and inner surfaces of the absorber tube. q5solabs: solar irradiation absorption from the incident solar irradiation to the outer glass envelope surface. q3solabs: solar irradiation absorption from the incident solar irradiation to the outer surface of the absorber tube. q4-2, conv: convection heat transfer from the absorber tube outer surface to the envelope inner surface. q4-2, rad: radiation heat transfer from the absorber tube outer surface to the envelope inner surface. q4-5, cond: conduction heat transfer from the envelope's inner surface to the envelope's outer surface. q5-6, conv: convection heat transfer from the envelope's outer surface to the atmosphere. q5-7, rad: radiation heat transfer from the envelope's outer surface to the sky.

    In the energy conservation system of equations, ˙q12,conv is the convection heat transfer between the absorber tube's inner surface and working fluid derived by Equations (14) and (15) (Bergman, 2011; Gnielinski, 1976; Jehring, 1992). h1 is the convection heat transfer coefficient of fluid at T1, D2 is the inner diameter of the absorber tube, T2 is the temperature of the absorber tube's inner surface, T1 is the temperature of working fluid, and NuD2 is the Nusselt number based on D2 and k1. Depending on the flow regime (laminar, transient, and turbulent), the Nusselt number can be derived.

    ˙q12,conv=h1D2π(T2T1)h1=NuD2k1D2Laminar flow: Nu=4.36 (14)
    For transient and turbulent flow: NuD2=f28(ReD21000)Pr11+12.7f28(Pr2311)(Pr1Pr2)0.11f2=(1.82log(ReD2)1.64)2 (15)

    Between the inner and outer surfaces of the absorber pipe, the mechanism of heat transfer is based on Equation (16). k23 is the conduction heat transfer coefficient of the absorber tube, T3 is the outer surface temperature of the absorber tube, and D3 is the outer diameter of the absorber tube.

    ˙q23,cond=2πk23lnD3D2(T2T3) (16)

    Heat transfer mechanisms can vary depending on the pressure between the envelope cover (mostly made of glass) and the absorber tube. Heat is transferred between the envelope and the absorber tube by free molecular convection when the pressure is lower than 1 Torr. When the pressure exceeds 1 Torr, the heat transfer mechanism becomes natural convection.

    Pressure lower than 1 Torr˙q34,conv=πD3h34(T3T4)h34=kstdD32lnD4D3+bλ(D3D4+1)b=(2a)(9γ5)2a(γ+1)λ=2.331×1020(T34+273.15)Paδ2 (17)
    Pressure higher than 1 Torr˙q34,conv=2.425k34(T3T4)(PrRaD30.861+Pr34)14(1+(D3D4)35)54RaD3=gβ(T3T4)D33ανβ=1Tavg (18)

    D3 is the inner diameter of the envelope, D4 is the diameter of the outer surface of the envelope, h34 is the convection heat transfer coefficient at the average temperature T34, T4 is the inner temperature of the envelope, and kstd is the conduction heat transfer of the gas. b is the interaction factor, λ is the mean free path, a is a correlation factor, γ is the ratio of specific heats of the gas, T34 is the average temperature, Pa is the pressure of the gas inside the envelope (mmHg), and δ is the molecular diameter of the gas. For the equation related to the higher pressure, Pr34 is the Prandtl number, RaD3 is the Rayleigh number, and β is the thermal expansion coefficient of the gas.

    The heat transfer mechanism between the absorber tube and the envelope is radiation, which can be derived via Equation (19). σ is the Stefan- Boltzmann constant, ε3 is the emissivity coefficient of the absorber, and ε4 is the emissivity coefficient of the envelope.

    ˙q34,rad=σπD3(T43T44)(1ε3+(1ε4)D3ε4D4) (19)

    The conduction heat transfer in the envelope is similar to the conduction heat transfer in the absorber tube [Equation (16)].

    There are two mechanisms for heat transfer between the atmosphere and the envelope: convection and radiation. Depending on the wind speed, convection can be natural or forced. The radiation heat loss exists due to the temperature difference between the envelope and the sky. The convection heat transfer between the envelope and the atmosphere is the main resource for heat loss, specifically when there is wind. T5 is the outer temperature of the envelope, T6 is the atmospheric temperature, h56 is the convection heat transfer coefficient of the air at the average temperature, k is the conduction heat transfer coefficient at the average temperature, D5 is the outer diameter of the envelope, and NuD5 is the Nusselt number based on the outer diameter of the envelope.

    ˙q56,conv=h56πD5(T5T6)h56=k56D5NuD5 (20)

    If there is no wind (wind speed lower than 0.1 m/s), the heat transfer mechanism between the envelope and the atmosphere is natural convection.

    ˉNuD5=[0.6+0.387Ra16D5[1+(0.559Pr56)916]β27]2RaD5=gβ(T5T6)D35α56ν56β=1T56Pr56=ν56α56 (21)

    RaD5 is the Rayleigh number for the air based on the outer diameter of the envelope, g is the gravitational acceleration, α56 is the thermal diffusivity of the air at T56, β is the volumetric expansion coefficient for an ideal gas, Pr56 is the Prandtl number for the air at temperature T56, ν56 is the kinematic viscosity of the air and temperature T56, and T56 is the average temperature of the film. If the wind speed becomes higher than 0.1 m/s, the heat transfer between the envelope and atmosphere is forced convection.

    ˉNuD5=CRemD5Prn6(Pr6Pr5)14{1<ReD<40: C=0.75, m=0.440<ReD<1000: C=0.51, m=0.51000<ReD<200000: C=0.26, m=0.6200000<ReD<1000000: C=0.076, m=0.7 (22)

    The radiation heat transfer between the envelope and the sky because of the temperature difference between the outer surface of the envelope and the sky can be derived from Equation (23).

    ˙q57,rad=σD5πε5(T45T47) (23)

    ε5 and T7 are the emissivity of the outer surface of the envelope and sky temperature, respectively. Generally, the sky temperature is 8 ℃ lower than the atmospheric temperature.

    The absorption of sunlight can be derived by Equation (24).

    ˙q5,SolAbs=˙qsiηenvαenvηenv=ε1ε2ε3ε4ε5ε6ρclKK=cosθ+0.000884θ0.00005369θ2 (24)

    ˙qsi is the radiation of light along the receiver, ηenv is the light efficiency of the envelope, and αenv is the absorption of the envelope. ε1 is the collector's shadow, ε2 is the localization error, ε3 is the geometry error, ε4 is the fouling on the mirrors, ε5 is the fouling on the collectors, ε6 is the unconsidered error, and ρcl is the reflection factor of the clean mirror. The factor K is the correction factor of the light angle, and θ is the deviation angle of the solar collector.

    The light absorption in the absorber tube can be derived from Equation (25).

    ˙q3,SolAbs=˙qsiηabsαabsηabs=ηenvτenv (25)

    ηabs is the light efficiency in the absorber tube, αabs is the absorption coefficient of the absorber tube, and τenv is the light transmission coefficient in the envelope.

    The envelope and the absorber tube at the focal length of the solar collector are maintained by the supporters. Generally, at the end of each solar element, there is one supporter every 4 m. The heat loss, assuming the support bracket behaves as an infinite fin with a temperature 10 ℃ lower than T3, can be derived from Equation (26):

    ˙qbracket,cond=ˉhbPbkbAcs,b(TbaseT6)LHCE (26)

    In Equation (26), ˉhb is the convection heat transfer of the supporter, which depends on the wind speed, Pb is the perimeter of the supporter, kb is the conduction heat transfer coefficient, Acs, b is the area of the cross-section of the bracket, Tbase is the base temperature of the bracket supporter, T6 is the atmospheric temperature, and LHCE is the length of the solar collector.

    By applying the second law of thermodynamics to the control volume of the solar collector, Equation (27) is obtained:

    ˙Exf,in+˙Exs=˙Exf,out+˙Exl+˙Exdes (27)

    ˙Exf,in is the inflow of exergy to the fluid, ˙Exs is the inflow of exergy from sunlight, ˙Exf,out is the outflow of exergy of the fluid, ˙Exl is the exergy loss, and ˙Exdes is the exergy destruction. The exergy of the sunlight can be calculated using (Landsberg & Mallinson, 1976). Tsun is the surface temperature of the sun (5780 K), and l is the interaction factor. fH is the view factor, which explains the geometry correlation between the radiation source and the receiver, εH is the dilution factor, and fr is the geometry factor of reflection by the absorber.

    ˙Exs=˙Qs×a(143×(TambTsun×l)+13×(TambTsun×l)4)l=(fHεHαfrεr)0.25 (28)

    The useful exergy is defined as the difference between the inflow exergy and the outflow exergy of the fluid (Badescu, 2018).

    ˙Exu=˙Exf,out˙Exf,in=˙Qu˙mfCpTambln(ToutTin)˙mfTambΔPρfTf (29)

    The exergy loss can be calculated using Equation (30) (Bellos & Tzivanidis, 2017). ˙Exl,opt is light exergy loss and ˙Exl,thermal is the thermal exergy loss.

    ˙Exl=˙Exl,opt+˙Exl,thermal˙Exl,opt=(1ηopt)×˙Exs˙Exl,thermal=˙Ql(1TambTr) (30)

    The exergy destruction shows irreversibility due to heat loss. Specifically, this parameter defines a probable work that disappears when there is thermal energy flow between hot and cold sources. The exergy destruction can be derived using Equation (31) (Kalogirou, 2004). In the solar collector, exergy destruction can occur mainly from two sources: between the absorber tube and the sun and between the absorber tube and the working fluid.

    ˙Exdes=˙Exdes,sr+˙Exdes,rf˙Exdes,sr=(1ηopt)×˙ExsQabs×(1TambTr)˙Exdes,rf=˙Qu×(1TambTr)˙Exu (31)

    Exergy efficiency can be calculated using Equation (32).

    ηexergy=˙Exu˙Exs (32)

    The net price cost of the solar collector can be calculated as Equation (33). The CRF is the capital recovery factor, CO&M is the operational and maintenance cost (which is considered as 2% of capital investment), Cs is the capital investment, i is the interest rate (4%), and n is the total operational years (Frangopoulos, 1987). CH is the cost of heat production by the collector, N is the total annual operational hours, and qu is the efficient heat transfer to the working fluid.

    NPC=CRF×(CO&M+Cs)CRF=(1+i)n(1+i)n1CH=NPCqu×N (33)

    The purchase cost of various components of solar collectors can be found in Table 2.

    Table 2.  Purchase cost of each component of a solar collector.
    Component Unit Cost
    Solar collector $/m2 266.7
    Working fluid $/lit 7.4
    Storage tank $/m3 44
    Pump $/kW 2100

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The environmental emission of a solar collector system can be derived using Equation (34) (Faizal et al., 2015).

    xCO2,eq=yCO2,eq×˙Qu×toperational (34)

    xCO2,eq is the equivalent emitted CO2 during the operational time of toperational, yCO2,eq is the emitted CO2 of the reference boundary control system, which is calculated using life cycle assessment methods, and ˙Qu is the produced power of the reference boundary system.

    Environmental assessment can also be carried out by another method. In this kind of assessment, which is similar to that of section 2.5, instead of power, the amount of exergy inside the system will be taken into account. This method is more conservative and accurate than energy-environment analysis.

    xCO2,eq=yCO2,eq×˙Exu×toperational (35)

    According to (Deniz & Çınar, 2016), the economic effects of producing carbon dioxide can be derived from Equation (36). CCO2 is the economic-environmental parameter of the system, and cCO2 is the cost of carbon dioxide production. It is possible to prevent climate change and other phenomena such as global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions as much as possible. By employing a conservative approach, the carbon emission cost method aims to provide a more tangible view of the environmental impacts. By formulating incentives and punishment policies, this method seeks to reduce the environmental impact of energy systems.

    CCO2=xCO2×cCO2 (36)

    The support vector regression technique follows the principle of structural risk minimization and has been successfully applied to data classification, regression, and nonlinear systems modeling (Vapnik, 1999). In a regression model with a training set G={(xi,yi)}niRd×R, in which xi and yi are the input and output variables, respectively, of ith pair of datasets, and n indicates the total number of datasets, the SVR is a kernel method that performs the nonlinear regression using a kernel trick. The kernel-induced feature space F is used to perform linear regression on each input xiRd via a nonlinear feature map ϕ(). For all training data, SVR aims to find a function that has minimum deviation ε from the actual target yi. Deviations greater than ε are not accepted. Accordingly, SVR considers the following linear estimation function in order to achieve the stated objective:

    f(x)=ωϕ(x)+bϕ:RnF,    ωF (37)

    In Equation (37), ω and b are coefficients and ϕ(x) indicates the high-dimensional feature space that is nonlinearly mapped from the input space x. The coefficients w and b can be estimated by minimizing the regularized risk function.

    R(f)=C1nni1Lε(f(xi)yi)+12ω2L(f(x,y))={|f(x)y|ε   |f(x)y|00                          otherwise (38)

    In Equation (38), ω22 is the Euclidean norm; this parameter is used to estimate the flatness of the function. This feature is used to avoid over-fitting. The difference between measured values and values calculated by the regression function is shown by ε. It is possible to visualize this difference as a tube surrounding the regression function. The parameter C represents the cost function measuring empirical risk; it is used to determine the trade-off between empirical risk and model flatness. In this context, C > 0 represents the penalty degree of the sample with error exceeding ε. The loss function Lε(f(xi)yi) is referred to as the ε-insensitive loss function. In the empirical analysis, C and ε are parameters that are defined by the user.

    Overall, SVR is a versatile and powerful tool for regression tasks, especially when dealing with nonlinear data and high-dimensional feature spaces. However, the choice of the machine learning method should always be guided by the specific characteristics of the dataset and the problem at hand.

    Statistical parameters are used to evaluate the performance of the SVR model for the training and testing sets: the coefficient of determination (R2), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), and mean squared error (MSE).

    R2=1Ni=1(YexpiYpredi)2Ni=1(YexpiˉYexp)2 (39)
    MAE=1NNi=1|YexpiYpredi| (40)
    RMSE=1NNi=1(YexpiYpredi)2 (41)
    MSE=1NNi=1(YexpiYpredi)2 (42)

    An optimization algorithm based on the flashing behavior of fireflies is called the firefly algorithm (FA). Bioluminescence is used by fireflies to communicate and attract mates. In order to optimize solutions to various optimization problems, the algorithm simulates this behavior. As a result of this knowledge, we can idealize some of the flashing characteristics of fireflies in order to develop algorithms that are inspired by fireflies. The FA is described by the following rules:

    ● Since fireflies are unisex, one firefly will be attracted to another firefly regardless of their gender.

    ● The attractiveness of a firefly is directly proportional to its brightness. Consequently, if there are two flashing fireflies, the less bright one will move toward the brighter one. There is a direct relationship between attractiveness and brightness, both of which decrease as their distance increases. A firefly will move randomly if there is no other that is brighter.

    ● Fireflies' brightness is affected or determined by the objective function's landscape.

    The FA is a relatively simple, yet effective, optimization algorithm that has gained significant attention due to its ease of implementation and strong global exploration capabilities. The algorithm's inherent ability to thoroughly search the solution space reduces the likelihood of becoming trapped in local optima. Its adaptability to various problem types, including continuous, discrete, and multi-objective optimization, further enhances its versatility. Furthermore, FA's parallel processing nature can significantly accelerate the optimization process. Its robustness to dynamic and noisy environments makes it well-suited for real-world applications.

    Compared to other metaheuristic algorithms, FA offers several advantages. Unlike genetic algorithms (GA), FA relies on a more straightforward attraction mechanism, which can lead to faster convergence. While simulated annealing (SA) explores the solution space sequentially, FA's simultaneous exploration of multiple solutions can potentially accelerate the search process. Additionally, FA's independence from pheromone-based information reduces computational overhead and simplifies implementation. Its suitability for non-differentiable, complex, and multi-modal functions further underscores its versatility.

    More information about this method and pseudo code is available in (Fister et al., 2013; Johari et al., 2013; Yang, 2010).

    The research methodology is illustrated in Figure 3. Initially, a dataset is produced using input variables and solving the governing equations mentioned in previous sections. The produced dataset is used for training the SVR model. Then, the SVR model is optimized by the firefly optimization method to maximize accuracy. Then, this model is used by the genetic algorithm (GA) for the optimization of design parameters.

    Figure 3.  Schematic of research methodology.

    The FA and GA are metaheuristic optimization algorithms that offer complementary strengths. FA excels in global exploration, efficiently traversing the search space, while GA is adept at local exploitation, refining solutions through crossover and mutation. By hybridizing these algorithms, it is possible to achieve a more balanced search process, combining the global exploration capabilities of FA with the local exploitation capabilities of GA. The hybrid approach can potentially improve convergence speed and solution quality. FA can guide the search toward promising regions of the solution space, while GA can refine these solutions further. This synergy can result in faster convergence to high-quality solutions compared to using either algorithm alone. Optimization problems in AI models, like tuning hyperparameters for SVR, often involve complex, multi-dimensional search spaces with multiple local optima. The hybrid method is well-suited for navigating such landscapes, as it combines the global search ability of GA with the local search refinement of FA (El-Shorbagy & El-Refaey, 2022; Mazen et al., 2016; Wahid et al., 2019; Wahid et al., 2019).

    The mathematical model has been validated by (Forristall, 2003). The weather conditions and solar collector characterization in (Forristall, 2003) have been used as the input data. Table 3 depicts the performance of the mathematical model in terms of each component.

    Table 3.  Performance of the model by comparing the outcome and experimental data in (Forristall, 2003).
    Variable Ref. (Forristall, 2003) Model Relative error (%)
    Toutlet 124 127.2 2.51
    Effective heat (W/m) 3402 3470.2 1.96
    Energy efficiency (%) 72.5 77.1 5.97

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The maximum relative error is the energy efficiency, which equals 5.97%. This high relative error is mainly due to the high nonlinearity degree of the system.

    In this study, the SVR machine learning model is presented for solving nonlinear and complex problems in order to calculate economic metrics and assess environmental impacts. The model will be implemented in detail, and it can be applied to other complex projects as well. An example of the complexity of this study is dealing with a system of nonlinear equations and numerous variables. Time, energy, and money will be consumed in solving five nonlinear equations in order to derive the temperature profile. According to the solution, the CPU time for the solution of the main function is approximately 10 s. The optimization of a problem with 250 generations and a population of 200 takes approximately 138 h. The optimization time for this problem is high, as can be seen from the example. Minitab V 22.1 was used to generate the standard input data. The discrete and continuous factors were selected as 3 and 7, respectively (Table 4). By using Minitab software, 1500 input datasets were created. Then, by using computational code, all datasets were used as input, and a system of equations using these input data was solved. For the training of the SVR model, the sets of inputs and outputs were selected. The outputs include energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, heat cost, CO2 emission cost based on energy, and CO2 emission cost based on the exergy. The heat cost function includes cost function ($) and heat gain (W), which relate to energy efficiency. The input and output of the SVR model are depicted in Table 4 and Table 5. The input design is also depicted in Table 6.

    Table 4.  Continuous variables used for the optimization.
    Factors Unit Lower bound Upper bound
    Inner diameter of the absorber tube m 0.01 0.1
    Distance between absorber tube and envelope m 0.005 0.1
    Length m 1 150
    Width m 0.5 8
    Mass flow Kg/s 0.001 10
    Pressure inside envelope Pa 0 100,000
    Initial temperature 15 65

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 5.  Discrete variables used for the optimization of the solar collector.
    Working fluid Gas inside the envelope Material of absorber tube
    Hitec XL Air Stainless steel 312
    Water Argon Copper
    Dowtherm Q Hydrogen Aluminium 2023
    Therminol VP1
    Therminol TD12
    Therminol 72

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 6.  Input design parameters and output of the model.
    Symbol Unit Description
    Input Din, abs m Inner diameter of the absorber tube
    Ren-abs m Distance between absorber tube and envelope
    ˙m Kg/s Working fluid mass flow
    Tin Initial temperature of the working fluid
    L m Length of collector
    w m Width of collector
    Penv Pa Pressure inside of the envelope
    Xabs Material of absorber tube
    XWf Working fluid
    Xenv Gas inside the envelope
    Output ηenergy % Energy efficiency
    ηexergy % Exergy efficiency
    CH $/kWh Heat cost
    CO2-energy $ CO2 emission cost
    CO2-exergy $ CO2 emission cost

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    For the regression of the dataset, a Gaussian kernel was selected. ε was selected for optimization using the firefly algorithm with the characterization as in Table 7.

    Table 7.  Characterization of firefly algorithm for optimization.
    Characterization Description
    Object of optimization ε
    Initial population 30
    Iteration 50
    Object function Mean squared error (MSE)
    Stop criteria 50th iteration
    Structure of fireflies Based on the scale of the kernel

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Figure 4 (a) illustrates the process of optimizing the SVR machine learning model. The MSE becomes constant after the 25th iteration of the optimization using the Firefly algorithm. Figure 4 (b) shows the regression results for all training, validation, and test data. According to the results, an ideal regression is obtained, and the regression number for the test data is 0.994. As well as using different methods to enhance accuracy, accuracy is primarily achieved by scaling input and output data to an appropriate range and applying nonlinear constraints to ensure meaningfulness. As a result of scaling data, large weights are not produced from the training model. An unstable model often exhibits high coefficient values, which may result in poor learning performance and sensitivity to input values, which may result in larger errors. Based on the analysis of the results, it is evident that there is a lack of data for regression for areas with nonlinear limitations on data generation. As a result, there are no data in this area, since these data are contradictory to reality and the fundamental physics of the problem. By following this approach, it is possible to avoid misdirection, incorrect training of machine learning algorithms, and the creation of unrealistic results. The optimization results are depicted in Figure 4 (c) by comparison between SVR and optimized SVR.

    Figure 4.  Performance of the SVR model: a) optimization procedure; b) results of the regression; c) comparison of performance and accuracy of the model before and after optimization.

    An effective and efficient way to provide accurate and appropriate machine learning models is to optimize and analyze the desired goals using different decision variables in order to solve the previously complex and time-consuming problem. Two object functions have been defined for the optimization of the design parameters of the system derived from the SVR model: exergy efficiency (%) and heat cost ($/kWh). As previously mentioned, the main reason for selecting the heat cost function was that it includes both the cost function ($) and the increase in useful heat gain (W), which are related to overall energy efficiency. In general, the optimization process aims to maximize exergy efficiency and minimize heat costs. Table 8 illustrates the main parameters of the genetic algorithm used in this study to optimize design parameters. The SVR model has the advantage of reducing the optimization process.

    Table 8.  Characterization of the genetic algorithm for optimization of design parameters.
    Characterization Multi-objective genetic algorithm
    Decision-making variables 10
    Population 200
    Crossover 0.6
    Mutation operator adaptfeasible
    Exchange function Intermediate
    Selection function tournament
    Accuracy 10-4
    Generation 250
    Optimization time 5.1 min

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Figure 5 illustrates the Pareto front, which indicates the two objective functions derived from the trained model. In accordance with the Pareto front, exergy efficiency increases as the heat cost function increases. Since energy efficiency decreases with an increase in exergy efficiency, which increases the cost function, there is an ideal point in the Pareto front that cannot be reached, but the optimal point is the closest to the ideal point.

    Figure 5.  Pareto front for two optimization functions: heat cost and exergy efficiency.

    As a result, the optimum reachable point based on the optimized design is the exergy efficiency of 14.05% with a heat cost of 0.0137 $/kWh. The optimized design parameters are illustrated in Table 9.

    Table 9.  Optimized design parameters.
    Optimized value Unit Optimized value
    Inner diameter of the absorber tube m 0.016
    Distance between absorber tube and envelope m 0.008
    Working fluid mass flow Kg/s 0.46
    Initial temperature of the working fluid 55.1
    Length of collector m 2.69
    Width of collector m 2.11
    Pressure inside of the envelope Pa 0
    Material of absorber tube Copper
    Working fluid Water
    Gas inside the envelope Argon

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Figure 6 shows the energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, heat cost, and CO2 emission cost based on energy and exergy according to the inner diameter. The heat cost will increase with an increase in diameter from 0.01 to 0.1 m. There is a descending trend in energy efficiency and exergy efficiency except for small diameters. Consequently, as the diameter decreases, both efficiencies will decrease. In small diameters, the pressure drop and the required power for pumping is high. As the diameter increases, the efficiency decreases due to a decrease in the Nusselt number and convection coefficient, which results in less heat being generated and more exergy being destroyed. So, there is a maximum point for the energy and exergy efficiencies when the inner diameter varies depending on whether the pressure drop or Nusselt number effect is dominant.

    Figure 6.  Effect of the inner diameter of the absorber tube on A) energy and exergy efficiencies, and B) heat cost-, energy-, and exergy-based CO2 emission cost.

    It is necessary to provide a gap between the tubular absorber and the metallic reflector in order to prevent conduction heat loss from the absorber to the reflector and to provide a glass envelope around the absorber, which will increase the thermal efficiency of the compound parabolic concentrator (CPC) module at high temperatures. As a result of the gap between the absorber and the envelope, light incident on the absorber is lost, which is referred to as "gap losses". It is therefore necessary a compromise between optical and thermal performance. Figure 7 depicts energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, heat cost, and CO2 emission cost based on the energy and exergy efficiency vs. distance between absorber and envelope. With an increase in the distance from 0.01 to 0.05 m, the energy and exergy efficiencies will decrease due to the increase of convection heat transfer in annulus space.

    Figure 7.  Effect of distance between the envelope and absorber tube on A) energy and exergy efficiencies, and B) Heat cost-, energy-, and exergy-based CO2 emission cost.

    Figure 8 illustrates the effect of working fluid mass flow on efficiency and economic parameters. The increase in the mass flow will result in an exergy efficiency decrease. There is a maximum point for energy efficiency when mass flow rises. By increasing the mass flow by more than 0.2 kg/s, energy efficiency will decrease because of the lower heat transfer. The higher speed of the working fluid decreases the residence time of volume control of fluid inside the collector; therefore, the heat transfer and output temperature will decrease. In this analysis, energy efficiency is influenced by two main parameters: pressure drop and heat transfer coefficient. With the increase of mass flow rate, both increase; at a low mass flow rate, the convective heat transfer coefficient is dominant. However, energy efficiency is first upward and then downward. The cost of carbon dioxide emission based on energy and the cost of carbon dioxide emission based on exergy is shown as a function of the previously presented parameters.

    Figure 8.  Effect of mass flow of working fluid on A) energy and exergy efficiencies, and B) heat cost-, energy-, and exergy-based CO2 emission cost.

    Based on Figure 9, with an increase in the inlet temperature, the energy efficiency decreases because the temperature difference between the fluid and the ambient environment decreases, resulting in a rise in the cost of heat. A temperature gap between hot and cold sources contributes to exergy destruction. By reducing the temperature difference, exergy destruction is reduced, which increases exergy efficiency.

    Figure 9.  Effect of the initial temperature of working fluid on A) energy and exergy efficiencies, and B) heat cost-, energy-, and exergy-based CO2 emission cost.

    Based on the trained model, a sensitivity analysis of all continuous and discrete variables was performed using the proposed machine learning approach. The sensitivity analysis was carried out based on the one factor at a time (OFAT) methodology. Based on the ±10% change in the design parameters, the percentage of change in energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, and heat cost was calculated. As can be seen from Figure 10, the results indicate that the most important parameter is the initial temperature of the working fluid.

    Figure 10.  Sensitivity analysis of design parameters on energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, and heat cost.

    In order to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed platform, a case study was developed to optimize a parabolic trough solar collector in Calgary (51.0447° N, 114.0719° W). Table 10 depicts the average monthly weather conditions with average solar irradiation.

    Table 10.  Monthly average of weather conditions in Calgary.
    Month Temperature (℃) Wind speed (km/h) Solar irradiation (kWh/m2/day) Average sunlight (h/day)
    January −9.2 11.6 2.3 3.2
    February −4.1 13.8 3.2 4.1
    March −3.8 15.1 4.3 6.1
    April 5.4 17.7 5.2 7.7
    May 15.3 16.0 5.7 10.1
    Jun 16.6 16.3 5.5 8.9
    July 18.1 13.1 6.4 6.2
    August 18.2 12.5 5.9 5.3
    September 13.4 12.7 5.1 3.6
    October 5.3 12.4 3.9 5.1
    November 2.0 11.2 2.8 3.7
    December 0.6 11.1 2.1 3.1

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The platform was used to optimize the design of a parabolic trough solar collector and the optimum parameters for this system were determined (Table 11). As can be seen from Table 11, due to a higher average wind speed in Calgary, the average heat loss will be higher than the design parameters in Table 9. This resulted in a decrease in the distance between the envelope and the absorber tube. Therefore, the envelope cross-sectional area would be smaller, thereby decreasing forced convection heat transfer. Because the average number of sunny hours per day in (Forristall, 2003) is higher than in Calgary, the mass flow in the optimized design in Calgary was reduced, and the width of the collector was increased.

    Table 11.  Optimum design parameters for a solar collector located in Calgary, Alberta.
    Optimized value Unit Optimized value
    Inner diameter of the absorber tube m 0.019
    Distance between absorber tube and envelope m 0.005
    Working fluid mass flow Kg/s 0.31
    Initial temperature of the working fluid 59.8
    Length of collector m 2.15
    Width of collector m 3.01
    Pressure inside of the envelope Pa 0
    Material of absorber tube Copper
    Working fluid Water
    Gas inside the envelope Argon

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    It is clear that the proposed platform can be used for optimizing the solar collector in each location based on the inputs and weather conditions. At optimum design parameters and operational conditions, the heat cost would be 0.0141 $/kWh, and the levelized cost of gas generation would be 0.15 $/kWh. However, the expected levelized cost of renewable energy in Alberta is 0.05 $/kWh by 2035 (Ali, 2018; Barrington-Leigh & Ouliaris, 2017; Patel & Parkins, 2023).

    In this comprehensive study, a support vector regression (SVR) algorithm was synergistically integrated with the firefly metaheuristic and genetic algorithms to forecast the economic profitability of solar power plants. Initially, mathematical modeling was employed to construct a robust dataset, which was subsequently utilized as the foundation for training the predictive model. Following the optimization of the SVR algorithm, the model was adeptly applied to evaluate the economic feasibility of the solar power plant. It was found that an increase in the inner diameter of the absorber tube was correlated with an escalation in heat costs, attributable to diminished energy and exergy efficiencies. Furthermore, it was observed that an increase in the distance between the envelope and the absorber tube resulted in a decline in heat cost, energy, and exergy efficiency, while paradoxically elevating CO2 emission costs. An optimal heat transfer fluid flow rate of 0.4 kg/s was identified. Through sensitivity analysis, the paramount importance of the initial fluid temperature as a critical design parameter was underscored. Additionally, it was determined that the width of the collector and the pressure within the envelope space significantly influenced the leveled cost of energy.

    In conclusion, the proposed hybrid optimization strategy was found to proficiently generate highly precise models, while concurrently fulfilling the objective of cost minimization. This methodology is considered to hold substantial promise for feasibility studies and conceptual design phases, offering a robust framework to evaluate the economic and environmental viability of energy projects prior to their construction.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    The authors declare no conflict of interest.

    [1] Mäkinen O, Wanhalinna V, Zannini E, et al. (2016) Foods for special dietary needs: Non-dairy plant-based milk substitutes and fermented dairy-type products. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 56: 339–349. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2012.761950
    [2] Peyer LC, Zannini E, Arendt EK (2016) Lactic acid bacteria as sensory biomodulators for fermented cereal-based beverages. Trends Food Sci Technol 54: 17–25. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2016.05.009
    [3] Friedman M (1996) Nutritional value of proteins from different food sources: A review. J Agric Food Chem 44: 6–29. doi: 10.1021/jf9400167
    [4] Durand A, Franks GV, Hosken RW (2003) Particle sizes and stability of UHT bovine, cereal and grain milks. Food Hydrocol 17: 671–678. doi: 10.1016/S0268-005X(03)00012-2
    [5] Preedy VR, (2011) In: Preedy VR, Ed, Beer in health and disease production, New York: Academic press.
    [6] Back W, (2005) In: Back W, Ed, Colour atlas and handbook of beverage biology, Verlag Hans Carl: Nürnberg, Germany, 10–112.
    [7] Menz G, Andrighetto C, Lombardi A, et al. (2010) Isolation, identification, and characterisation of beer-spoilage lactic acid bacteria from microbrewed beer from Victoria, Australia. J Inst Brew 116: 14–22. doi: 10.1002/j.2050-0416.2010.tb00393.x
    [8] Priest FG, (2003) Gram-positive brewery bacteria, In: Priest FG, Campbell I, Eds, Brewing Microbiology, 3rd Ed., New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 181–217.
    [9] Suzuki K, Asano S, Iijima K et al. (2008) Sake and beer spoilage lactic acid bacteria—A review. J Inst Brew 114: 209–223. doi: 10.1002/j.2050-0416.2008.tb00331.x
    [10] Thelen K, Beimfohr C, Snaidr J (2006) Evaluation study of the frequency of different beer-spoiling bacteria using the VIT analysis. Tech Q Master Brew Assoc Am 43: 31–35.
    [11] Spitaels F, Wieme AD, Janssens M, et al. (2014) The microbial diversity of traditional spontaneously fermented lambic beer. PLoS One 9: e95384. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095384
    [12] Tonsmeire M, (2014) Sour beers: A primer, In: Tonsmeire M, Ed, American sour beers: innovative techniques for mixed fermentations, Boulder, CO: Brewers Publication, 1–9.
    [13] Bokulich NA, Bamforth CW (2013) The microbiology of malting and brewing. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 77: 157–172. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.00060-12
    [14] Pittet V, Morrow K, Ziola B (2011) Ethanol tolerance of lactic acid bacteria, including relevance of the exopolysaccharide gene, gtf. J Am Soc Brew Chem 69: 57–61.
    [15] Kalač P, Šavel J, Křížrek M, et al. (2002) Biogenic amine formation in bottled beer. Food Chem 79: 431–434. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(02)00193-0
    [16] Kalač P, Křížrek M (2003) A review of biogenic amines and polyamines in beer. J Inst Brewing 109: 123–128. doi: 10.1002/j.2050-0416.2003.tb00141.x
    [17] Geissler AJ, Behr J, Vogel RF (2016) Multiple genome sequences of the important beer-spoiling species Lactobacillus backii. Genom Announ 4: e00826–16.
    [18] Bergsveinson J, Friesen V, Ewen E, et al. (2015) Genome sequence of rapid beer-spoiling isolate Lactobacillus brevis BSO 464. Genom Announ 3: e01411–15.
    [19] Kim DW, Choi SH, Kang A, et al. (2011) Draft genome sequence of Lactobacillus malefermentans KCTC 3458. J Bacteriol 193: 5537. doi: 10.1128/JB.05710-11
    [20] Behr J, Geissler AJ, Schmid J, et al. (2016) The identification of novel diagnostic marker genes for the detection of beer-spoiling Pediococcus damnosus strains using the BlAst diagnostic gene finder. PLoS One 1: e0152747.
    [21] Snauwaert I, Stragier P, De Vuyst L, et al. (2015) Comparative genome analysis of Pediococcus damnosus LMG 28219, a strain well adapted to the beer environment. BMC Genom 16: 267. doi: 10.1186/s12864-015-1438-z
    [22] Pittet V, Abegunde T, Marfleet T, et al. (2012) Complete genome sequence of the beer spoilage organism Pediococcus claussenii ATCC BAA-344T. J Bacteriol 194: 1271–1272. doi: 10.1128/JB.06759-11
    [23] Bergsveinson J, Friesen V, Ziola B. (2016) Transcriptome analysis of beer-spoiling Lactobacillus brevis BSO 464 in degassed and gassed beer. Int J Food Micro 235: 28–35. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2016.06.041
    [24] Pittet V, Phister TG, Ziola B (2013) Transcriptome sequence and plasmid copy number analysis of the brewery isolate Pediococcus claussenii ATCC BAA-344T during growth in beer. PLoS One 8: e73627. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073627
    [25] Bergsveinson J, Ewen E, Friesen V, et al. (2016) Transcriptional activity and role of plasmids of Lactobacillus brevis BSO 464 and Pediococcus claussenii ATCC BAA-344T during growth in the presence of hops. AIMS Microbiol 2: 460–478. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.4.460
    [26] Behr J, Geissler AJ, Preissler P, et al. (2015) Identification of ecotype- specific marker genes for categorization of beer-spoiling Lactobacillus brevis. Food Microbiol 51: 130–138. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2015.05.015
    [27] Sami M, Yamashita H, Hirono T, et al. (1997) Hop-resistant Lactobacillus brevis contains a novel plasmid harboring a multidrug resistance-like gene. J FermentBioeng 84: 1–6.
    [28] Snauwaert I, Roels SP, Van Nieuwerburg F, et al. (2016) Microbial diversity and metabolite composition of Belgian red-brown acidic ales. Int J Food Microbiol 221: 1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.12.009
    [29] Bokulich NA, Bergsveinson J, Ziola B, et al. (2015) Mapping microbial ecosystems and spoilage-gene flow in breweries highlights patters of contamination and resistance. eLife 4: e04634.
    [30] Garofalo C, Osimani A, Milanović V, et al. (2015) The occurrence of beer spoilage lactic acid bacteria in craft beer production. J Food Sci 80: M2845–M2852. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.13112
    [31] Bartowsky EJ (2009) Bacterial spoilage of wine and approaches to minimize it. Lett Appl Microbiol 48: 149–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2008.02505.x
    [32] Gagné S, Lucas PM, Perello MC, et al. (2011) Variety and variability of glycosidase activities in an Oenococcus oeni strain collection tested with synthetic and natural substrates. J Appl Microbiol 110: 218–228. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04878.x
    [33] Milchlmayr H, Nauer S, Brandes W, et al. (2012) Release of wine monoterpenes from natural precursors by glycosidases from Oenococcus oeni. Food Chem 135: 80–87. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.04.099
    [34] Antalick G, Perello MC, de Revel G (2012) Characterization of fruity aroma modifications in red wines during malolactic fermentation. J Agric Food Chem 60: 12371–12383. doi: 10.1021/jf303238n
    [35] Lerm E, Engelbrecht L, du Toit M (2011) Selection and characterisation of Oenococcus oeni and Lactobacillus plantarum South African wine isolates for use as malolactic fermentation starter cultures. South Afr J Enol Vit 32: 280–295.
    [36] Rossouw D, du Toit M, Bauer FF (2012) The impact of co-inoculation with Oenococcus oeni on the transcriptome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and on the flavour active metabolite profiles during fermentation in synthetic must. Food Microbiol 29: 121–131. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2011.09.006
    [37] Mills DA, Rawsthorne H, Parker C, et al. (2005) Genomic analysis of Oenococcus oeni PSU-1 and its relevance to winemaking. FEMS Microbiol Rev 26: 465–475.
    [38] Mohedano ML, Russo P, de los Rios V, et al. (2014) A partial proteome reference map of the wine lactic acid bacterium Oenococcus oeni ATCC BAA-1163. Open Biol 4: 130154. doi: 10.1098/rsob.130154
    [39] Bokulich NA, Joseph CML, Allen G, et al. (2012) Next-generation sequencing reveals significant bacterial diversity of botrytized wine. PLoS One 7: e36357. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036357
    [40] Pinto C, Pinho D, Cardoso R (2015) Wine fermentation microbiome: a landscape from different Portuguese wine appellations. Front Microbiol 6: 905.
    [41] Bokulich NA, Thorngate JH, Richardson PM, et al. (2014) Microbial biogeography of wine grapes is conditioned by cultivar, vintage, and climate. PNAS 111: E139–E148. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1317377110
    [42] Bokulich NA, Collins TS, Masarweh C, et al. (2016) Associations among wine grape microbiome, metabolome, and fermentation behavior suggest microbial constribution to regional wine characteristics. mBio 7: e00631–16.
    [43] Zarraonaindia I, Owens SM, Weisenhorn P, et al. (2015) The soil microbiome influences grapevine-associated microbiota. mBio 6: e02527–14.
    [44] Campanaro S, Treu L, Vendramin V, et al. (2014) Metagenomic analysis of the microbial community in fermented grape marc reveals that Lactobacillus fabifermentans is one of the dominant species: insights into its genome structure. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98: 6015–6037. doi: 10.1007/s00253-014-5795-3
    [45] de Nadra MCM, (2007) Nitrogen metabolism in lactic acid bacteria from fruits: a review, In: Mèndez-Vilas A, Ed, Comm Curr Edu Top Trend Appl Microbiol.
    [46] Lonvaud-Funel A (2001) Biogenic amines in wines: role of lactic acid bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Lett 199: 9–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2001.tb10643.x
    [47] Haakensen M, Schubert A, Ziola B (2008) Multiplex PCR for putative Lactobacillus and Pediococcus beer-spoilage genes and ability of gene presence to predict growth in beer. J Am Soc Brew Chem 66: 63–70.
    [48] Araque I, Gil J, Carreté R, et al. (2009) Detection of arc genes related with ethyl carbamate precursors in wine lactic acid bacteria. J Agric Food Chem 57: 1841–1847. doi: 10.1021/jf803421w
    [49] Spano G, Massa S (2006) Environmental stress response in wine lactic acid bacteria: beyond Bacillus subtilus. Crit Rev Microbiol 32: 77–86. doi: 10.1080/10408410600709800
    [50] Foligne J, Dewulf J, Breton O (2010) Probiotic properties of non-conventional lactic acid bacteria immunomodulation by Oenococcus oeni. Int J Food Microbiol 140: 136–145. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2010.04.007
    [51] García-Ruiz A, González de Llano D, Esteban-Fernández, et al. (2014) Assessment of probiotic properties in lactic acid bacteria isolated from wine. Food Microbiol 44: 220–225. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2014.06.015
    [52] Mital BK, Steinkraus KH (1979) Fermentation of soy milk by lactic acid bacteria: A review. J Food Protect 42: 895–899. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X-42.11.895
    [53] Wang YC, Yu RC, Chou CC (2002) Growth and survival of bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria during the fermentation and storage of cultured soymilk drinks. Food Microbiol 19: 501–508. doi: 10.1006/fmic.2002.0506
    [54] Donkor ON, Henriksson A, Vasiljevic T, et al. (2007) α-galactosidase and proteolytic activities of selected probiotic and dairy cultures in fermented soymilk. Food Chem 104: 10–20. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.10.065
    [55] LeBlanc JG, Garro MS, Silvestroni A, et al. (2004) Reduction of α-galactooligosaccharides in soyamilk by Lactobacillus fermentum CRL 722: in vitro and in vivo evaluation of fermented soyamilk. J Appl Microbiol 97: 876–881. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02389.x
    [56] Silvestroni A, Connes C, Sesma F, et al. (2012) Characterization of the melA locus for α-galactosidase in Lactobacillus plantarum. Appl Environ Microbiol 68: 5464–5471.
    [57] Aguirre L, Herbert EM, Garro MS (2014) Proteolytic activity of Lactobacillus strains on soybean proteins. Food Sci Technol 59: 780–785.
    [58] Pescuma M, Turbay MBE, Mozzi F, et al. (2013) Diversity in proteinase specificity of thermophilic lactobacilli as revealed by hydrolysis of dairy and vegetable proteins. Appl Microbiol Biotechnl 97: 7831–7844. doi: 10.1007/s00253-013-5037-0
    [59] Savijoki K, Ingmer H, Varmanen P (2006) Proteolytic systems of lactic acid bacteria. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 71: 394–406. doi: 10.1007/s00253-006-0427-1
    [60] Juarez del Valle M, Laiño JE, Savoy de Giori G, et al. (2014) Riboflavin producing lactic acid bacteria as a biotechnological strategy to obtain bio-enriched soymilk. Food Res Int 62: 1015–1019. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.05.029
    [61] Molina V, Médici M, de Valdez GF, et al. (2012) Soybean-based functional food with vitamin B 12-producing lactic acid bacteria. J Funct Foods 4: 831–836. doi: 10.1016/j.jff.2012.05.011
    [62] Torres AC, Suárez NE, Font G, et al. (2016) Draft genome sequence of Lactobacillus reuteri strain CRL 1098, an interesting candidate for functional food development. Genom Announ 4: e00806–16.
    [63] Wang YC, Yu RC, Chou CC (2006) Antioxidative activities of soymilk fermented with lactic acid bacteria and bifidiobacterium. Food Microbiol 23: 128–135. doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2005.01.020
    [64] Wagar LE, Champagne CP, Buckley ND, et al. (2009) Immunomodulatory properties of fermented soy and dairy milks prepared with lactic acid bacteria. J Food Sci 74: M423–M430. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01308.x
    [65] Fritsch C, Vogel RF, Toelstede S (2015) Fermentation performance of lactic acid bacteria in different lupin substrates—influence and degradation ability of antinutritives and secondary metabolites. J Appl Microbiol 119: 1075–1088. doi: 10.1111/jam.12908
    [66] Hickisch A, Beer R, Vogel RF, et al. (2016) Influence of lupin-based milk alternative heat treatment and exopolysaccharide-producing lactic acid bacteria on the physical characteristics of lupin-based yogurt alternatives. Food Res Int 84: 180–188. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2016.03.037
    [67] De Angelis M, Gallo G, Corbo MR, et al. (2003) Phytase activity in sourdough lactic acid bacteria: purification and characterization of a phytase from Lactobacillus sanfranciscensis CB1. Int J Food Microbiol 87: 259–270. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1605(03)00072-2
    [68] Palacios MC, Haros M, Rosell CM, et al. (2005) Characterization of an acid phosphatase from Lactobacillus pentosus: regulation and biochemical properties. J Appl Microbiol 98: 229–237. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02447.x
    [69] Reale A, Mannina L, Tremonte P, et al. (2004) Phytate degradation by lactic acid bacteria and yeasts during the wholemeal dough fermentation: a 31P NMR study. J Agric Food Chem 52: 6300–6305. doi: 10.1021/jf049551p
    [70] Lee C, Beuchat LR (1991) Changes in chemical composition and sensory qualities of peanut milk fermented with lactic acid bacteria. Int J Food Microbiol 13: 273–283. doi: 10.1016/0168-1605(91)90085-4
    [71] Schaffner DW, Beuchat LR (1986) Fermentation of aqueous plant seed extracts by lactic acid bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 51: 1072–1076.
    [72] Wang NF, Yan Z, Li CY, et al. (2011) Antioxidant activity of peanut flour fermented with lactic acid bacteria. J Food Biochem 35: 1514–1521. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-4514.2010.00473.x
    [73] Bernat N, Cháfer M, Chiralt A, et al. (2014) Hazelnut milk fermentation using probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and inulin. Int J Food Sci Technol 49: 2553–2562. doi: 10.1111/ijfs.12585
    [74] Bernat N, Cháfer M, Chiralt A, et al. (2015) Almond milk fermented with different potentially probiotic bacteria improves iron uptake by intestinal epithelial (Caco-2) cells. Int J Food Stud 4: 49–60. doi: 10.7455/ijfs/4.1.2015.a4
    [75] Blandino A, Al-Aseeri ME, Pandiella SS, et al. (2003) Cereal-based fermented foods and beverages. Food Res Int 36: 527–543. doi: 10.1016/S0963-9969(03)00009-7
    [76] Agarry O, Nkama O, Akoma O (2010) Production of Kununzaki (a Nigerian fermented cereal beverage) using starter culture. Int Res J Microbiol 1: 18–25.
    [77] Vieira-Dalodé G (2008) Use of starter cultures of lactic acid bacteria and yeasts as inoculum enrichment for the production of gowé, a sour beverage from Benin. Afr J Microbiol Res 2: 179–186.
    [78] Onyago C, Bley T, Raddatz H, et al. (2004) Flavour compounds in backslop fermented uji (an East African sour porridge). Euro Food Res Technol 218: 579–583. doi: 10.1007/s00217-003-0870-5
    [79] Muyanja, CMBK, Narhvus JA, Langsrud T (2012) Organic acids and volatile organic compounds produced during traditional and starter culture fermentation of Bushera, a Ugandan fermented cereal beverage. Food Biotechnol 26: 1–28. doi: 10.1080/08905436.2011.617252
    [80] Hong X, Chen J, Liu L, et al. (2016) Metagenomic sequencing reveals the relationship between microbiota composition and quality of Chinese Rice Wine. Sci Rep 6: 26621. doi: 10.1038/srep26621
    [81] Sankar Bora S, Keot J, Das S (2016) Metagenomics analysis of microbial communities associated with a traditional rice wine starter culture (Xaj-pitha) of Assam, India. 3 Biotech 6: 1–13.
    [82] Liu SP, Yu JX, Wei XL, et al. (2016) Sequencing-based screening of functional microorganism to decrease the formation of biogenic amines in Chinese rice wine. Food Cont 64: 98–104. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.12.013
    [83] Fang RS, Dong YC, Chen F, et al. (2015) Bacterial diversity analysis during the fermentation processing of traditional Chinese yellow rice wine revealed by 16S rDNA 454 pyrosequencing. J Food Sci 80: M2265–M2271. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.13018
    [84] Liu SP, Mao J, Liu YY, et al. (2015) Bacterial succession and the dynamics of volatile compounds during the fermentation of Chinese rice wine from Shaoxing region. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 31: 1907–1921. doi: 10.1007/s11274-015-1931-1
    [85] Turpin W, Humblot C, Guyot JP (2011) Genetic screening of functional properties of lactic acid bacteria in a fermented pearl millet slurry and in the metagenome of fermented starchy foods. Appl Environ Microbiol 77: 8722–8734. doi: 10.1128/AEM.05988-11
    [86] Humblot C, Turpin W, Chevalier F, et al. (2014) Determination of expression and activity of genes involved in starch metabolism in Lactobacillus plantarum A6 during fermentation of a cereal-based gruel. Int J Food Microbiol 185: 103–111. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2014.05.016
    [87] Leemhuis H, Pijning T, Dobruchowska JM, et al. (2013) Glucansucrases: Three-dimensional structures, reactions, mechanisms, α-glucan analysis and their implications in biotechnology and food applications. J Biotechnol 163: 250–272. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2012.06.037
    [88] Tieking M, Gänzle MG (2005) Exopolysaccharides from cereal-associated lactobacilli. Trends Food Sci Technol 16: 79–84. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2004.02.015
    [89] Russo P, de Chiara MLV, Capozzi V, et al. (2016) Lactobacillus plantarum strains for multifunctional oat-based foods. LWT-Food Sci Technol 68: 288–294. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2015.12.040
    [90] Lamontanara A, Caggianiello G, Orrù L, et al. (2015) Draft genome sequence of Lactobacillus plantarum Lp90 isolated from wine. Genom Announ 3: e00097–15.
    [91] Lynch KM, Lucid A, Arendt EK, et al. (2015) Genomics of Weissella cibaria with an examination of its metabolic traits. Microbiol 161: 914–930. doi: 10.1099/mic.0.000053
    [92] Zannini E, Mauch A, Galle S, et al. (2013) Barley malt wort fermentation by exopolysaccharide-forming Weissella cibaria MG1 for the production of a novel beverage. J Appl Microbiol 115: 1379–1387. doi: 10.1111/jam.12329
    [93] Zannni E, (2015) Chapter 5: Impact of exopolysaccharide-producing Weissella cibaria MG1 on the properties of soy yoghurt, In: Zannin E, Functional application of lactic acid bacteria exopolysaccharide in complex food systems, PhD Thesis, University of Cork, 88–126.
    [94] Luckow T, Delahunty C (2004) Which juice is “healthier”? A consumer study of probiotic non-dairy juice drinks. Food Qual Pref 15: 751–759.
    [95] Yoon KY, Woodams EE, Hang YD (2004) Probiotification of tomato juice by lactic acid bacteria. J Microbiol 42: 315–318.
    [96] Maki M, (2004) Lactic acid bacteria in vegetables fermentation, In: Salminen S, Von WrightA, Ouwehand A, Eds, Lactic Acid Bacteria Microbiological and Functional Aspects, New York: Marcel Dekker, 419–430.
    [97] Urbonaviciene D, Viskelis P, Bartkiene E, (2015) The use of lactic acid bacteria in the fermentation of fruits and vegetables—technological and functional properties, In: Ekinci D, Author, Biotechnology, Croatia: Intech, 135–164.
    [98] Di Cagno R, Filannino P, Gobetti M, (2015) Chapter 14: Vegetable and fruit fermentation by lactic acid bacteria, In: Mozzi F, Raya RR, Vignolo GM, Eds, Biotechnology of Lactic Acid Bacteria: Novel Applications, 2nd Ed, New Jersey: Wiley, 216–230.
    [99] Sheehan VM, Ross P, Fitzgerald GF (2007) Assessing the acid tolerance and the technological robustness of probiotic cultures for fortification in fruit juices. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8: 279–284. doi: 10.1016/j.ifset.2007.01.007
    [100] Reddy LV, Min JH, Wee YJ (2015) Production of probiotic mango juice by fermentation of lactic acid bacteria. Microbiol Biotechnol Lett 43: 120–125. doi: 10.4014/mbl.1504.04007
    [101] Wang CY, Ng CC, Su H, et al. (2009) Probiotic potential of noni juice fermented with lactic acid bacteria and bifidobacteria. Int J Food Sci Nutr 6: 98–106.
    [102] Yoon KY, Woodams EE, Hang YD (2005) Fermentation of beet juice by beneficial lactic acid bacteria. Lebensm-Wiss Technol 38: 73–75. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2004.04.008
    [103] Yoon KY, Woodams EE, Hang YD (2006) Production of probiotic cabbage juice by lactic acid bacteria. Biores Techol 97: 1427–1430. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2005.06.018
    [104] Filannino P, Di Cagno R, Crecchio C, et al. (2016) Transcriptional reprogramming and phenotypic switching associated with the adaptation of Lactobacillus plantarum C2 to plant niches. Sci Rep 6: 27392. doi: 10.1038/srep27392
    [105] Kahala M, Ahola V, Mäkimattila E, et al. (2014) The use of macroarray as a simple tool to follow the metabolic profile of Lactobacillus plantarum during fermentation. Adv Microbiol 4: 996. doi: 10.4236/aim.2014.414111
    [106] Riveros-Mckay F, Campos I, Giles-Gómez M, et al. (2014) Draft genome sequence of Leuconostoc mesenteroides P45 isolated from Pulque, a traditional mexican alcoholic fermented beverage. Genom Announ 2: e01130–14.
    [107] Giles-Gómez M, García JGS, Matus V, et al. (2016) In vitro and in vivo probiotic assessment of Leuconostoc mesenteroides. SpringerPlus 5: 1–10. doi: 10.1186/s40064-015-1659-2
    [108] Chiou TY, Oshima K, Suda W, et al. (2016) Draft genome sequence of Lactobacillus farciminis NBRC 111452, isolated from kôso, a Japanese sugar-vegetable fermented beverage. Genom Announ 4: e01514–15.
    [109] Chiou TY, Suda W, Oshima K, et al. (2016) Changes in the bacterial community in the fermentation process of kôso, a Japanese sugar-vegetable fermented beverage. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 1: 1–8.
    [110] Gram L, Ravn L, Rasch M, et al. (2002) Food spoilage—interactions between food spoilage bacteria. Int J Food Microbiol 78: 79–97. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1605(02)00233-7
    [111] Temitope FP, Oluchi UE (2015) Studies of the antifungal activity of Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus fermentum on spoilage fungi of tomato fruit. J Microbiol Res 5: 95–100.
    [112] Crowley S, Majony J, van Sinderen D (2013) Broad-spectrum antifungal-producing lactic acid bacteria and their application in fruit models. Folia Microbiol 58: 291–299. doi: 10.1007/s12223-012-0209-3
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Ali Omidkar, Razieh Es'haghian, Hua Song, Using machine learning methods for long-term technical and economic evaluation of wind power plants, 2025, 3, 29497205, 100115, 10.1016/j.gerr.2025.100115
    2. Dipak Kumar Mandal, Kritesh Kumar Gupta, Nirmalendu Biswas, Nirmal K. Manna, Somnath Santra, Erdem Cuce, A Novel Comparative Study of Machine Learning Surrogate Models for Solar Chimney (SC) Plant Performance Evaluation: Thermo-Physical Insights, 2025, 03605442, 136744, 10.1016/j.energy.2025.136744
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(8687) PDF downloads(1576) Cited by(13)

Figures and Tables

Tables(1)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog