scholarly journals Structure and Functional Capacity of a Benzene‐mineralizing, Nitrate‐reducing Microbial Community

Author(s):  
Samuel C. Eziuzor ◽  
Felipe Borim Corrêa ◽  
Shuchan Peng ◽  
Júnia Schultz ◽  
Sabine Kleinsteuber ◽  
...  



2017 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tzu-Hsuan Tu ◽  
Li-Wei Wu ◽  
Yu-Shih Lin ◽  
Hiroyuki Imachi ◽  
Li-Hung Lin ◽  
...  


2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-409
Author(s):  
Baizhen Gao ◽  
Rushant Sabnis ◽  
Tommaso Costantini ◽  
Robert Jinkerson ◽  
Qing Sun

Microbial communities drive diverse processes that impact nearly everything on this planet, from global biogeochemical cycles to human health. Harnessing the power of these microorganisms could provide solutions to many of the challenges that face society. However, naturally occurring microbial communities are not optimized for anthropogenic use. An emerging area of research is focusing on engineering synthetic microbial communities to carry out predefined functions. Microbial community engineers are applying design principles like top-down and bottom-up approaches to create synthetic microbial communities having a myriad of real-life applications in health care, disease prevention, and environmental remediation. Multiple genetic engineering tools and delivery approaches can be used to ‘knock-in' new gene functions into microbial communities. A systematic study of the microbial interactions, community assembling principles, and engineering tools are necessary for us to understand the microbial community and to better utilize them. Continued analysis and effort are required to further the current and potential applications of synthetic microbial communities.



1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Glenn Pransky

Abstract According to the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, a functional capacity evaluation (FCE) measures an individual's physical abilities via a set of activities in a structured setting and provides objective data about the relationship between an impairment and maximal ability to perform work activities. A key distinction between FCEs and self-reported activities of daily living is that the former involve direct observation by professional evaluators. Numerous devices can quantify the physical function of a specific part of the musculoskeletal system but do not address the performance of whole body tasks in the workplace, and these devices have not been shown to predict accurately the ability to perform all but the simplest job tasks. Information about reliability has been proposed as a way to identify magnification and malingering, but variability due to pain and poor comprehension of instructions may cause variations in assessments. Structured work capacity evaluations involve a set of activities but likely underestimate the individual's ability to do jobs that involve complex or varying activities. Job simulations involve direct observation of an individual performing actual job tasks, require a skilled and experienced evaluator, and raise questions about expense, time, objectivity and validity of results, and interpretation of results in terms of the ability to perform specific jobs. To understand the barriers to return to work, examiners must supplement FCEs with information regarding workplace environment, accommodations, and demotivators.



1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 4-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Welch

Abstract Functional capacity evaluations (FCEs) have become an important component of disability evaluation during the past 10 years to assess an individual's ability to perform the essential or specific functions of a job, both preplacement and during rehabilitation. Evaluating both job performance and physical ability is a complex assessment, and some practitioners are not yet certain that an FCE can achieve these goals. An FCE is useful only if it predicts job performance, and factors that should be assessed include overall performance; consistency of performance across similar areas of the FCE; consistency between observed behaviors during the FCE and limitations or abilities reported by the worker; objective changes (eg, blood pressure and pulse) that are appropriate relative to performance; external factors (illness, lack of sleep, or medication); and a coefficient of variation that can be measured and assessed. FCEs can identify specific movement patterns or weaknesses; measure improvement during rehabilitation; identify a specific limitation that is amenable to accommodation; and identify a worker who appears to be providing a submaximal effort. FCEs are less reliable at predicting injury risk; they cannot tell us much about endurance over a time period longer than the time required for the FCE; and the FCE may measure simple muscular functions when the job requires more complex ones.





1982 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 364-365
Author(s):  
Linda K. George


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document