Question 1

Fed-batch calculation: A reactor starts with 2.0 L medium at 0.10 g/L biomass. You feed 1.0 L/h of substrate medium (no biomass) for 10 h. After 10 h, X = 0.20 g/L in the reactor. How much biomass was produced during this period?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Fed-batch mass balances require careful attention to changing volume. Biomass produced equals the increase in reactor biomass mass (final mass minus initial mass), assuming no biomass in the feed and no harvest/bleed. This problem checks comfort with basic accumulation logic. Given Data / Assumptions: Initial volume V0 = 2.0 L; initial biomass concentration X0 = 0.10 g/L. Feed rate F = 1.0 L/h for 10 h, biomass-free; thus ΔV_feed = 10 L. Final volume Vf = 2.0 + 10 = 12.0 L (no outflow). Final biomass concentration Xf = 0.20 g/L. Concept / Approach: Total biomass mass in the vessel is M = X * V. Biomass produced = M_final − M_initial − M_in + M_out. With no biomass in the feed (M_in = 0) and no outflow (M_out = 0), production reduces to ΔM = XfVf − X0V0. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute initial biomass mass: M_initial = X0 * V0 = 0.10 g/L * 2.0 L = 0.20 g.Compute final biomass mass: M_final = Xf * Vf = 0.20 g/L * 12.0 L = 2.40 g.Production over 10 h: ΔM = 2.40 − 0.20 = 2.20 g.Thus, biomass produced during the period is 2.2 g. Verification / Alternative check: Sanity check: concentration doubled while volume increased sixfold; mass scaling to 2.4 g is consistent with both effects. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1.5 g and 3.0 g: inconsistent with mass balance at the stated concentrations/volumes. 6.0 g: far exceeds what 0.20 g/L at 12 L can support. 0.2 g: that is the initial mass, not the produced mass. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting the volume change in fed-batch; using ΔX instead of Δ(XV). Final Answer: 2.2 g.

Question 2

Chemostat washout: An E. coli strain has μ_max = 0.8 h^-1 on glucose. If the dilution rate D = 1.2 h^-1, what is the steady-state cell concentration in the reactor?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In a chemostat, the dilution rate D (h^-1) sets the specific growth rate at steady state for a limiting substrate, provided D < μ_max. If D exceeds μ_max, cells cannot reproduce fast enough to balance outflow, leading to washout. This question evaluates recognition of the washout criterion. Given Data / Assumptions: Monod kinetics; single limiting substrate. μ_max = 0.8 h^-1; dilution rate D = 1.2 h^-1. Well-mixed continuous stirred-tank reactor at steady input/output. Concept / Approach: Steady state in a chemostat requires μ = D. Since μ ≤ μ_max, if D > μ_max, no positive biomass concentration can satisfy μ = D. The trajectory moves toward X → 0 as cells are washed out faster than they divide. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare D with μ_max: 1.2 h^-1 > 0.8 h^-1.Conclude μ cannot reach D at any feasible substrate concentration.Therefore, biomass decreases toward zero: washout. Verification / Alternative check: Phase-plane or mass-balance solutions show X* = 0 is the only steady state when D ≥ μ_max given standard Monod form. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Increase/oscillate/random: contradict dynamical behavior under D > μ_max. Decrease but nonzero: impossible at steady state when D exceeds μ_max. Common Pitfalls: Confusing transient overshoots with steady state; forgetting μ is bounded by μ_max. Final Answer: It will be zero (washout occurs).

Question 3

Among typical industrial metabolites, which is best described as a secondary metabolite (formed mainly in the non-growth or late growth phase and not essential for primary metabolism)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Secondary metabolites are compounds not directly required for growth or energy metabolism; they often have ecological functions (antibiotics, pigments, toxins) and are typically synthesized in stationary or late exponential phase. Distinguishing them from primary metabolites is fundamental in fermentation technology and strain improvement. Given Data / Assumptions: Primary metabolites: associated with growth (e.g., ethanol, organic acids, amino acids during exponential phase). Secondary metabolites: antibiotics (penicillin), polyketides, non-ribosomal peptides. Industrial examples listed span both classes. Concept / Approach: Penicillin synthesis is tightly linked to stationary phase physiology and nitrogen/carbon regulation; it is a hallmark secondary metabolite. In contrast, ethanol and acetic/citric acids are classic primary metabolites produced during active growth as part of central carbon flux redistribution. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify which option is an antibiotic: penicillin.Relate antibiotics to secondary metabolism (nonessential for growth).Select penicillin as the secondary metabolite. Verification / Alternative check: Time-course production curves show penicillin titers rising post-growth; pathway genes are often regulated by global stress/secondary metabolism regulators. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Ethanol, acetic acid, citric acid: tied to energy production and overflow—primary metabolites. CO2: core product of respiration; primary. Common Pitfalls: Equating “valuable industrial product” with “secondary metabolite”—many valuable products are primary. Final Answer: Penicillin (a beta-lactam antibiotic).

Question 4

Product formation patterns: When the product formation rate is approximately proportional to the biomass growth rate, how is the product described?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Classifying product formation as growth-associated, non-growth-associated, or mixed helps choose operating modes (batch, fed-batch, chemostat) and feeding strategies. The classic Luedeking–Piret model relates product formation rate to growth and to biomass concentration through coefficients α and β. Given Data / Assumptions: Product rate r_p is observed to scale with growth rate r_x. No evidence of significant formation after growth ceases. Standard microbial production context. Concept / Approach: In the Luedeking–Piret form, r_p = α * r_x + β * X. If α > 0 and β ≈ 0, product is growth-associated (formation tracks growth). If α ≈ 0 and β > 0, product is non-growth-associated (formed mainly in stationary phase). Intermediate cases are mixed. Therefore, the observed proportionality to growth indicates growth association. Step-by-Step Solution: Map observation “proportional to growth rate” to α term dominance.Infer β is negligible: little product beyond growth.Classify product as growth associated. Verification / Alternative check: Time-course data show product titer increasing primarily during exponential phase, flattening as growth slows—typical for growth-associated products (e.g., many primary metabolites, some enzymes). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Non-growth associated/uncoupled: would require product to form after growth ends. Mixed-type: would need both α and β significant. “Zero association”: contradicts the stated proportionality. Common Pitfalls: Confusing “appears during growth” with “requires high biomass”; association is about rate coupling, not absolute amounts. Final Answer: Growth associated.

Question 5

In a chemostat (continuous stirred tank bioreactor), when washout has occurred (cells removed with the effluent so that the culture cannot sustain growth), what happens to the concentrations of biomass (X), growth-limiting substrate (S), and product…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A chemostat (continuous stirred tank bioreactor) operates at a fixed dilution rate with continuous inflow of fresh medium and outflow of culture. “Washout” occurs when the dilution rate exceeds the culture’s net specific growth rate so that the reactor cannot retain cells. Understanding the fate of biomass (X), limiting substrate (S), and product (P) at washout is fundamental to bioprocess control and design. Given Data / Assumptions: Perfect mixing (reactor contents equal effluent composition). Limiting substrate concentration in the feed is Sf. At washout steady state, cells cannot be maintained (X → 0). P is a growth-associated product unless otherwise stated. Concept / Approach: At steady state, mass balances link production/consumption to dilution. If cells are washed out, there is essentially no biomass to consume substrate or to form product. Therefore, S rises to the feed value Sf, X tends to zero, and P tends to zero for a growth-associated product (or to a low value if it is non-growth associated with negligible formation at X ≈ 0). Step-by-Step Solution: Biomass balance at washout: generation by growth ≈ 0 while outflow removes any residual cells → X ≈ 0.Substrate balance: with X ≈ 0, there is negligible consumption; by mixing, S in the reactor approaches S in the feed → S ≈ Sf.Product balance: with no cells, formation rate is ~0 for growth-associated products; dilution removes any residual product → P ≈ 0.Hence the only consistent description is X ≈ 0, P ≈ 0, S ≈ Sf. Verification / Alternative check: Steady-state chemostat equations give X = Yx/s (Sf − S). At washout, X = 0 implies S = Sf. For growth-associated product P = Yp/x X (or Yp/s (Sf − S)); with X = 0 and S = Sf, P → 0. Why Other Options Are Wrong: X, S, and P all zero: mixing ensures S equals Sf, not zero. Cannot be predicted: standard chemostat theory predicts these values. None of the above or Only P accumulates: contradict mass balance logic at washout. Common Pitfalls: Assuming a non-growth-associated product necessarily accumulates; without biomass, its formation ceases and dilution flushes it out. Confusing transient behavior with steady state is another error. Final Answer: X and P will be ~0 while S equals the substrate concentration in the feed

Question 6

In cellular metabolism, which pathway provides the fastest overall route for reoxidation of NADH back to NAD+ under typical physiological conditions?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: NADH reoxidation to NAD+ is essential to sustain glycolysis, the TCA cycle, and many anabolic pathways. Cells use distinct mechanisms depending on oxygen availability and species. Identifying the fastest route clarifies why oxygen dramatically increases ATP yield and metabolic throughput. Given Data / Assumptions: In aerobic respiration, O2 is the terminal electron acceptor. In anaerobic respiration, acceptors include nitrate, sulfate, etc. In fermentation, organic molecules (e.g., pyruvate or acetaldehyde) accept electrons. Rate reflects electron transfer potential and chain capacity. Concept / Approach: Aerobic electron transport chains use the large redox drop from NADH to O2, enabling rapid electron flux and robust proton motive force generation. This supports the highest ATP production rate per unit NADH reoxidized and the fastest steady reoxidation under comparable conditions. Step-by-Step Solution: Compare terminal acceptors by redox potential: O2 has a highly positive potential, maximizing driving force.Greater driving force typically supports higher electron flux through respiratory complexes.Fermentation relies on substrate-level conversions and is slower per NADH because there is no membrane-coupled chain.Therefore, aerobic respiration gives the fastest NADH → NAD+ turnover. Verification / Alternative check: Measured oxygen consumption rates and ATP production in aerobic cells exceed fluxes seen in fermentative states for many organisms, confirming rapid NADH reoxidation with O2. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Anaerobic respiration: can be fast but generally slower than O2-based chains due to lower redox driving force. Fermentation: lacks an electron transport chain; lower energy yield and slower reoxidation per unit time. Decomposition/Photoreduction in the dark: not relevant cellular mechanisms. Common Pitfalls: Equating ATP yield strictly with rate; while system-dependent, O2 usually enables both high yield and high flux in standard conditions. Final Answer: Aerobic respiration (electron transport chain with O2 as terminal acceptor)

Question 7

A continuous stirred tank reactor (chemostat) contains biomass at 20 g dry weight per litre. Under ideal mixing, what is the biomass concentration in the effluent stream?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In a continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR/chemostat), perfect mixing is assumed: composition is uniform throughout the vessel and identical to the effluent. This principle is crucial when estimating productivities, washout risk, and downstream loading on separators. Given Data / Assumptions: Reactor biomass concentration X = 20 g L^-1 (dry weight). Ideal mixing (no concentration gradients). Steady operating conditions (no abrupt transients). Concept / Approach: Mass balance for a well-mixed tank gives Cout = Creactor for any component that is neither selectively retained nor phase-partitioned. Cells are suspended and exit with the same concentration unless cell retention devices are used (e.g., membranes, settlers). Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the reactor model: ideal CSTR.Apply perfect mixing: effluent concentration equals reactor concentration.Therefore, X_out ≈ 20 g L^-1.This holds unless special retention hardware changes phase behavior. Verification / Alternative check: Residence-time distribution for a CSTR and tracer studies show effluent composition equals mixed bulk fluid composition, validating the equality. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Greater than/More than 30: would imply enrichment or phase separation not present here. Less than 20: contradicts perfect mixing without retention. Zero: only true if a perfect cell retention barrier is used or at washout with X ≈ 0. Common Pitfalls: Confusing chemostats with perfusion or immobilized-cell systems where effluent cell concentration may differ. Final Answer: Approximately 20 g dry weight per litre

Question 8

In an ideal plug flow tubular reactor (no radial gradients), what is the axial velocity profile across any given cross-section?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The plug flow reactor (PFR) idealization assumes that all fluid elements move with the same axial velocity and that there is no axial mixing. This simplifies reaction engineering analysis and forms a reference case against which real tubular reactors are compared. Given Data / Assumptions: No radial gradients (uniform properties over the cross-section). No axial dispersion (no backmixing). Steady flow conditions. Concept / Approach: Under the PFR idealization, the cross-sectional velocity profile is flat: each fluid “plug” advances at the same speed. Real laminar flow in pipes has a parabolic profile; turbulence can flatten it, and static mixers or design choices further approach the plug assumption. Step-by-Step Solution: Define ideal PFR: uniform velocity and composition at each axial location.Translate to kinematics: axial velocity does not vary across radius → constant profile.Therefore choose “Constant (flat profile).”Note that non-idealities reintroduce gradients and dispersion. Verification / Alternative check: Residence-time distribution for a PFR is delta-like; deviations (broadening) indicate non-plug behavior linked to non-uniform velocity. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Varying with time or power function of time: describes unsteady flow, not the ideal cross-sectional profile. Non-linear/parabolic: typical of laminar flow but contradicts the plug idealization. Randomly oscillatory: not a design assumption. Common Pitfalls: Confusing real hydrodynamic profiles with the idealized model used for reaction calculations. Final Answer: Constant (flat profile across the cross-section)

Question 9

What is the ideal tubular-flow fermenter model (no radial gradients, no axial mixing) commonly called in biochemical engineering?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Fermenter hydrodynamics are frequently idealized as either perfectly mixed tanks or plug flow tubes. The chosen model affects predicted conversions, selectivities, and scale-up strategies. Given Data / Assumptions: Tubular flow without radial gradients. Negligible axial dispersion (no backmixing). Steady operation. Concept / Approach: These assumptions define a plug flow device. In biochemical engineering contexts, the term “plug flow fermenter” mirrors the chemical engineering “PFR” and is contrasted with the “CSTR” (continuous stirred tank fermenter). Step-by-Step Solution: Match hydrodynamic assumptions to canonical models.No radial gradients + no axial mixing → plug flow.Therefore, the ideal tubular-flow fermenter is called a plug flow fermenter.Other names (column fermenter) do not guarantee plug hydrodynamics. Verification / Alternative check: Residence-time distribution tests for an ideal PFR yield a narrow distribution; CSTRs show exponential RTD, confirming model differences. Why Other Options Are Wrong: CSTF: represents perfect mixing, not plug flow. Column fermenter: geometry only; flow may be mixed or dispersed. High-dilution/washout: an operating condition, not a hydrodynamic model. Batch bubble column: unsteady, gas–liquid mixing; not plug flow by default. Common Pitfalls: Equating vessel geometry with hydrodynamics; true plug flow is a kinetic idealization, not guaranteed by a cylindrical shape. Final Answer: Plug flow fermenter

Question 10

When Escherichia coli grow in a well-aerated medium with abundant oxygen, which outcome is expected regarding central metabolism and fructose-1,6-bisphosphate (F1,6BP)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Escherichia coli adjusts metabolism depending on oxygen and substrate availability. Under well-aerated conditions, cells preferentially channel carbon through glycolysis and the TCA cycle with oxidative phosphorylation, minimizing overflow metabolites typical of fermentative states. Understanding the behavior of fructose-1,6-bisphosphate (F1,6BP), a key glycolytic intermediate and regulator, clarifies this shift. Given Data / Assumptions: Medium is well aerated; oxygen is not limiting. Glucose is present at non-inhibitory levels (no severe catabolite repression/overflow). Cells are wild-type E. coli under standard laboratory conditions. Concept / Approach: In the presence of O2, E. coli engages aerobic respiration: pyruvate enters the TCA cycle, and NADH is reoxidized via the respiratory chain, yielding high ATP per mole of glucose. F1,6BP serves as a glycolytic intermediate and allosteric regulator but typically does not accumulate excessively in balanced aerobic growth; large accumulations and overflow (e.g., acetate) are more associated with oxygen limitation or very high glucose feeding that pushes fermentative pathways. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the regime: well-aerated → aerobic respiration favored.Infer metabolite profile: intermediates like F1,6BP remain near steady cellular setpoints; no pathological buildup is expected.Fermentation is suppressed because respiratory NADH reoxidation is efficient with O2 as acceptor.Therefore, choose the statement that indicates no marked accumulation and aerobic respiration dominance. Verification / Alternative check: Chemostat and batch studies show high oxygen transfer correlates with low fermentative by-products (e.g., lactate, ethanol in other organisms, acetate overflow minimized), supporting stable glycolytic intermediates. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Accumulation leading to respiration: accumulation is unnecessary for respiration and is not characteristic. Accumulation leading to fermentation or anaerobic respiration: contradicts well-aerated conditions. Always accumulates: ignores regulatory homeostasis and condition dependence. Common Pitfalls: Assuming that high glucose always causes fermentative overflow; oxygen availability and feed strategy are decisive. Final Answer: F1,6BP does not accumulate markedly; cells primarily perform aerobic respiration

Question 11

A Pseudomonas aeruginosa culture has a maximum specific growth rate μmax = 0.8 h^-1 on glucose. In a chemostat, what dilution rate D will prevent washout?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In a chemostat, steady state requires that the net specific growth rate equals the dilution rate (μ = D). If D exceeds the culture’s μ at the operating conditions, biomass cannot keep up with outflow and washout occurs. Choosing D relative to μmax is a basic control decision. Given Data / Assumptions: μmax = 0.8 h^-1 for Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the stated medium. Operating substrate concentration supports μ ≤ μmax. No cell retention device. Concept / Approach: To avoid washout, set D < μ at the achieved substrate level. Since μ cannot exceed μmax, a safe guideline is D < μmax, with margin for disturbances and maintenance requirements. Step-by-Step Solution: At steady state: μ = D.Washout threshold: D ≥ μ → at limiting case, D = μmax is risky.Therefore, to prevent washout: choose D < 0.8 h^-1.Additional safety margin (e.g., 0.6–0.7 h^-1) is common in practice. Verification / Alternative check: Chemostat theory predicts X → 0 as D approaches μmax from below if substrate is limiting and any perturbation pushes μ < D. Why Other Options Are Wrong: D > 0.8: guarantees washout. D = 0.8: marginal; susceptible to washout. D = 1.6: far above μmax; immediate washout. D = 0: not a chemostat (becomes batch). Common Pitfalls: Ignoring that μ depends on substrate; operating too close to μmax reduces robustness to fluctuations. Final Answer: Less than 0.8 h^-1

Question 12

Which organism is well known to continue active metabolism at very high glucose concentrations by switching to overflow pathways (e.g., ethanol), thereby tolerating high substrate levels?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: High substrate concentrations can inhibit many microbes via substrate inhibition or by causing redox imbalances. Some organisms, however, maintain metabolism by redirecting flux to overflow pathways. Recognizing such organisms informs fed-batch feeding strategies. Given Data / Assumptions: Focus on glucose as the substrate. “Continue metabolism” refers to sustaining high flux even when respiration saturates. Comparison among common biotech organisms. Concept / Approach: Saccharomyces cerevisiae is Crabtree-positive: at high glucose (even with oxygen), it favors fermentative metabolism (ethanol production) to sustain glycolytic flux. This allows continued metabolism at substrate levels that might otherwise slow strictly respiratory organisms. In contrast, many bacteria reduce growth when facing substrate inhibition or rely on respiratory capacity limits without strong overflow to ethanol. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify a Crabtree-positive microbe: S. cerevisiae.Mechanism: glycolysis oversupplies pyruvate/NADH; yeast excretes ethanol (overflow), maintaining NAD+ and ATP via substrate-level phosphorylation.Outcome: metabolism continues at high glucose where other species may be inhibited.Therefore choose Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Verification / Alternative check: Industrial high-gravity brewing and bioethanol processes exploit yeast’s ability to metabolize at very high sugar concentrations, confirming practical tolerance and overflow. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: largely respiratory; less associated with ethanol overflow. Bacillus subtilis: can overflow acetate, but classical high-sugar ethanol overflow is a yeast trait. Escherichia coli: shows acetate overflow but is more sensitive to substrate inhibition than yeast at very high sugars. Nitrosomonas: chemolithoautotroph; not relevant to high-glucose regimes. Common Pitfalls: Equating any overflow (e.g., acetate in E. coli) with robust high-sugar tolerance; yeast remains the canonical example for high-glucose ethanol overflow. Final Answer: Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Question 13

In fed-batch (batch-fed) operation, how is the growth-limiting substrate supplied to the bioreactor?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Fed-batch processes are widely used to avoid substrate inhibition, control specific growth rate, and extend production phases. Unlike simple batch, fed-batch introduces fresh substrate after startup to manage cell physiology and productivity. Given Data / Assumptions: A growth-limiting substrate is selected (e.g., glucose, ammonia). Objective is to regulate growth and product formation. Operation does not include continuous outflow (unlike chemostat). Concept / Approach: In fed-batch, substrate is supplied during fermentation—either in pulses (periodically) or as a controlled continuous feed. This keeps the bulk concentration low while sustaining metabolism, preventing overflow or repression, and enabling high cell densities. Step-by-Step Solution: Start with a batch charge at low initial substrate to avoid inhibition.Initiate a feed strategy (pulse or continuous) to match consumption.Use feedback (e.g., dissolved oxygen, CO2, soft sensors) to adjust the feed rate.Harvest when target biomass or product is reached; no steady outflow occurs. Verification / Alternative check: Industrial processes (e.g., recombinant protein expression, high-gravity ethanol) demonstrate improved titers by fed-batch feeding compared to one-shot batch additions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Only at the beginning: describes batch, not fed-batch. Only at the end: does not support controlled growth. Never added: contradicts the definition of fed-batch. Only if washout occurs: washout is a chemostat concern; fed-batch has no continuous outflow. Common Pitfalls: Confusing fed-batch with continuous culture; fed-batch has inflow but no outflow (except sampling), so volume increases over time. Final Answer: Added during the process, typically periodically or continuously as a feed

Question 14

In continuous bioreactors, what does the term “pseudo-steady state” describe most accurately?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: True steady state implies that all state variables (concentrations, temperature, rates) are constant in time. In real continuous bioreactors, small disturbances, controller actions, or periodic feeds can cause bounded fluctuations around a nominal operating point. Engineers often refer to this practical regime as “pseudo-steady state.” Given Data / Assumptions: Continuous operation with feedback control or minor disturbances. No long-term drift in average values. Measurements show bounded oscillations around a mean. Concept / Approach: Instead of exact time invariance, the system hovers near the design point with small periodic or stochastic deviations. Mass balances still hold on average, and performance metrics (e.g., productivity) are stable when averaged over time. This regime is common in industrial practice where perfect constancy is neither achievable nor necessary. Step-by-Step Solution: Define strict steady state: dC/dt = 0 for all components.Recognize practical operation: small dC/dt ≠ 0 instantaneously, but averages are constant.Characterize signals: oscillatory behavior around setpoints (e.g., DO, pH, biomass estimates) with closed-loop control.Thus, pseudo-steady state corresponds to oscillations around a stable mean, not monotonic trends. Verification / Alternative check: Time-series analysis (moving averages) reveals stationarity in mean and variance despite oscillations, supporting the pseudo-steady description. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Pseudomonads being cultured: a pun, not the definition. Monotonic increase/decrease: indicates drift, not steady behavior. Absolutely no variation: describes idealized steady state, not pseudo-steady. Common Pitfalls: Confusing pseudo-steady oscillations with instability; instability shows growing amplitude or drift, whereas pseudo-steady oscillations remain bounded. Final Answer: Reactor concentrations oscillate around a mean value rather than remaining strictly constant

Question 15

In a plug flow reactor (PFR) used for bioprocessing, where along the reactor do cells encounter the highest substrate concentration, given that fresh feed enters at one end and flows without back-mixing?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A plug flow reactor (PFR) is an idealized flow model widely applied in biochemical engineering to describe tubular bioreactors with negligible axial mixing. Understanding how substrate concentration changes along the reactor length is essential for predicting growth, product formation, and potential inhibition patterns for cells immobilized or suspended within the flow. Given Data / Assumptions: Ideal plug flow: negligible axial back-mixing; radial mixing is fast. Fresh feed with the highest substrate concentration enters at the inlet. Substrate is consumed monotonically along the flow direction. No significant radial gradients after initial entrance effects (well-mixed cross-section). Concept / Approach: In a PFR, each fluid element advances down the reactor while reacting. Substrate concentration S decreases with axial coordinate z due to cellular uptake. Therefore, the maximum S occurs at z ≈ 0 (feed entrance), and S is lowest near the outlet. Cells exposed early in the reactor face the strongest driving force for uptake and, if relevant, the highest risk of substrate inhibition. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify model: plug flow implies S = S(z) with dS/dz < 0 for consuming reactions.At z = 0 (entrance), S = S_in (the highest concentration).As z increases, cells consume substrate, so S decreases along the length.Hence, cells located at the entrance experience the highest S. Verification / Alternative check: Mass balance for a first-order uptake: dS/dz = -k * S / u (u = superficial velocity) integrates to S(z) = S_in * exp(-k z / u), confirming a monotonic decline from the inlet to the outlet. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Near the effluent: S is lowest there after consumption.Midway: S has already dropped from inlet value.Near the wall: in an ideal PFR, radial gradients are negligible; wall proximity does not define the axial maximum. Common Pitfalls: Confusing PFR with CSTR behavior, assuming recirculation leads to uniform S, or overemphasizing wall effects in an ideal radial-mixing assumption. Final Answer: Cells located near the feed entrance

Question 16

In fed-batch bioreactor modeling under standard assumptions (no outlet during feed, constant density), the time rate of change of reactor volume dV/dt is equal to which quantity?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Fed-batch operation increases reactor volume over time by adding feed without removing broth (until harvest). A basic dynamic mass balance on the liquid reveals how volume evolves and links directly to concentration dynamics of substrates and biomass. Given Data / Assumptions: No outlet flow during the feeding phase (closed to effluent). Liquid density is approximately constant; evaporation and entrainment are negligible. Reactor is well mixed. Concept / Approach: The unsteady overall volume balance is dV/dt = F_in − F_out. In fed-batch with no intentional effluent, F_out ≈ 0, so dV/dt = F_in. This identity underpins canonical fed-batch equations for state variables, e.g., d(XV)/dt = μXV − D_loss terms, and for concentrations via dilution effects Ċ = (generation − consumption)/V − (F_in/V) * C + (F_in/V) * C_feed when relevant. Step-by-Step Solution: Write volume balance: dV/dt = F_in − F_out.Apply fed-batch condition: F_out ≈ 0 during feed.Therefore, dV/dt = F_in (the feed rate).Consequences: dilution term (F_in/V) appears in all concentration balances. Verification / Alternative check: Integrating dV/dt = F_in over time yields V(t) = V0 + ∫ F_in dt, matching practical observations where liquid level rises by the cumulative feed volume. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Initial volume: a constant; does not represent a rate.Volume of solids: typically small and does not define the liquid volume rate.None of these: incorrect because the inflow rate is the correct equality. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting evaporation or sampling losses in real systems; assuming density changes invalidate the balance (they affect mass, not the volumetric identity under constant density assumption). Final Answer: The inlet volumetric flow rate (feed rate)

Question 17

Continuous cultures (chemostats) in industry: which statement is NOT correct regarding their uses and risks?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Continuous cultures (chemostats, turbidostats) maintain cells at steady state by balancing growth with dilution. They are powerful for research and some industrial processes, but adoption varies depending on regulatory and operational constraints. Given Data / Assumptions: Industry practice differentiates commodity processes and strictly regulated biopharma manufacturing. Contamination control and genetic stability are crucial in long duration runs. Batch and fed-batch remain dominant for many pharmaceuticals due to validation simplicity. Concept / Approach: Wastewater treatment widely uses continuous flow with recycle (activated sludge), fitting option A. Long-running chemostats face contamination and mutant takeover risks, supporting option B. Continuous operation reduces turnaround downtime, supporting option D. In contrast, broad adoption for pharmaceuticals has historically favored batch/fed-batch because validation, containment, and lot release are simpler; while continuous bioprocessing is emerging, it is not accurately described as “very useful” in the sense of being widely adopted across pharma manufacturing. Step-by-Step Solution: Match known applications: wastewater treatment → continuous.Assess risks: mutation/contamination → major concerns in long runs.Operational uptime: continuous reduces cleaning frequency.Pharma adoption: still limited/targeted compared with batch/fed-batch dominance; therefore, this claim is not correct. Verification / Alternative check: Industry surveys and regulatory guidance consistently show fed-batch leading in biologics; continuous is growing but not yet the norm for final drug substance manufacture. Why Other Options Are Wrong: A, B, and D correctly reflect typical practice and constraints. Common Pitfalls: Equating research utility with broad GMP adoption; underestimating contamination control and validation challenges for multi-month chemostats. Final Answer: They are very useful and widely adopted for pharmaceutical production

Question 18

Two chemostats (continuous bioreactors) with the same organism, same feed, and the same dilution rate start with different initial glucose concentrations (reactor 1: 10 g L^-1, reactor 2: 0.1 g L^-1). At steady state, how do their residual glucose c…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In a chemostat operating at steady state, the specific growth rate equals the dilution rate, and residual substrate depends on kinetic parameters and dilution, not on initial conditions. This question probes understanding of steady-state independence from start-up history. Given Data / Assumptions: Both reactors: identical organism, feed, temperature, pH, and dilution rate D. Monod kinetics apply: mu = mu_max * S / (Ks + S). Steady state achieved with biomass washout avoided (D < mu_max). Concept / Approach: At steady state, mu = D. Solving Monod for S* gives S* = (D * Ks) / (mu_max − D) when S* ≪ feed substrate and D < mu_max. S* is independent of the initial glucose present at t = 0; transients decay as the system converges to the unique steady state defined by D and kinetics. Step-by-Step Solution: Write steady-state condition: mu(S*) = D.Solve: D = mu_max * S* / (Ks + S*) ⇒ S* determined solely by D, mu_max, Ks.Recognize initial substrate influences only the transient trajectory, not S*.Therefore, residual glucose is equal in both reactors at steady state. Verification / Alternative check: Phase-plane analysis shows a single asymptotically stable steady state for D below washout; numerical simulations with different initial S converge to the same S*. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Greater/lesser/always zero: contradicts steady-state dependence on D and kinetics rather than initial conditions; S* is nonzero unless D → 0 or feed is limiting in special cases. Common Pitfalls: Confusing batch carryover with chemostat steady state; assuming memory of initial charge persists despite continuous dilution and consumption. Final Answer: Glucose in reactor 1 = glucose in reactor 2

Question 19

Chemostat calculation: Lactococcus lactis has a maximum specific growth rate of 1.23 h^-1 in a glucose–yeast extract medium. What is its specific growth rate at steady state in a 4 L reactor fed at 2 L h^-1 (assume steady state is feasible)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In a chemostat at steady state, the specific growth rate equals the dilution rate. This simple relationship allows rapid checks that an operating point is below washout and consistent with organism kinetics. Given Data / Assumptions: Reactor working volume V = 4 L. Feed volumetric flow F = 2 L h^-1. Maximum specific growth rate mu_max = 1.23 h^-1. Steady state is achieved (i.e., D < mu_max). Concept / Approach: Dilution rate D = F / V. At steady state (no washout), μ = D. If D > mu_max, washout occurs and steady state with biomass cannot be maintained; otherwise μ tracks D exactly. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute D: D = 2 / 4 = 0.5 h^-1.Compare with mu_max: 0.5 h^-1 < 1.23 h^-1, so steady state with cells is feasible.Therefore, μ at steady state equals D = 0.5 h^-1. Verification / Alternative check: Steady-state mass balance on biomass: d(XV)/dt = (μ − D) X V = 0 ⇒ μ = D. Independent of Monod parameters as long as the reactor can supply that μ with available substrate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1.2 h^-1: close to mu_max, but μ at steady state equals D, not mu_max.2.4 or 4.0 h^-1: exceed mu_max and the computed D; physically impossible under given conditions. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up μ with μ_max; forgetting to divide F by V; ignoring the washout constraint μ_max > D. Final Answer: 0.5 h^-1

Question 20

How does environmental pH modulate the toxicity of organic acids to microbial cells in culture?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Organic acids such as acetic, lactic, and benzoic acids are common inhibitors and preservatives. Their inhibitory potency depends strongly on extracellular pH due to acid dissociation equilibria and membrane transport properties. Given Data / Assumptions: Weak acid HA with pKa in the physiological range. Cell membrane is relatively permeable to undissociated HA but not to A^-. Cytoplasm is buffered near neutral pH. Concept / Approach: At lower pH, the fraction of acid in the undissociated form (HA) increases per Henderson–Hasselbalch. HA diffuses across the membrane, dissociates inside the cytosol, and releases protons, collapsing proton motive force and imposing an ATP burden for pH homeostasis. Accumulated anions can also perturb metabolism, elevating toxicity. Step-by-Step Solution: Decrease extracellular pH → higher [HA]/[A^-] outside.More HA diffuses inward across lipid bilayer.Inside, HA → H^+ + A^- raising proton load and anion accumulation.Energy diverted to proton pumping and stress responses → inhibited growth. Verification / Alternative check: Minimal inhibitory concentrations of weak acids drop as pH is lowered; preservative efficacy of benzoate and sorbate increases at acidic pH, consistent with the mechanism. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Decreasing toxicity at low pH contradicts undissociated-acid entry mechanism.pH independence is false for weak acids near their pKa.Fixed maximum at pH 7.0 lacks mechanistic basis. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring intracellular buffering limits; assuming charged species cross membranes readily; overlooking energy costs of pH homeostasis. Final Answer: Toxicity increases as the pH falls (more undissociated acid penetrates)

Fermentation Reactors Questions