17.01.2013 Views

Reviewer Comments - EERE

Reviewer Comments - EERE

Reviewer Comments - EERE

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2011 Algae Platform Review – <strong>Reviewer</strong> <strong>Comments</strong><br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong> <strong>Comments</strong> are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s<br />

Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 6 Criteria Score: 2<br />

In addition to developing state of the art photobioreactors, the PI's suggest to tether cells to cellulose<br />

membranes. As a laboratory excercise on a nano-scale, this is most interesting, but unrealistic commercial<br />

scale production. In addition to the costs of cooling and materials, biofilms will coat the internal walls of<br />

any photobioreactor. Such films will restrict photon transfer and undermine the need to tether the cells. A<br />

simpler approach would be to innoculate with metaoblically manipulated cells that secrete oil and allow<br />

them to coat the inner walls. Still, cooling costs will likely challenge this approach. There is also the issue<br />

of CO2 delivery to tethered cells within a commercial scale photobioreactor system.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 7 Criteria Score: 3<br />

Well-defined criteria for success and milestone decision points were not presented. It did not appear that<br />

the scope was defiend by a preliminary evaluation of commercial viability.<br />

Presenter Response<br />

xx<br />

2. Technical Progress and Accomplishments<br />

Please evaluate the degree to which the project has made progress in its objectives and stated project<br />

management plan has met its objectives in achieving milestones and overcoming technical barriers.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong> <strong>Comments</strong><br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 1 Criteria Score: 4<br />

On the basis of the results in the presentation, I believe more progress on the key thrusts could be made if<br />

less attention was given to nanobodies, etc.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 2 Criteria Score: 3<br />

This project is 50% complete. Membrane development and antibody stages of processing development<br />

appear expensive and their effectiveness for scale-up, especially with algae growing under commercial<br />

conditions needs to be demonstrated more rigorously.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 3 Criteria Score: 7<br />

Not a whole lot of progress yet. However, the effort aims to address: 1. High resolution lipidomics<br />

analysis capacity developed, 2. Transcriptomic analysis of N deprivation underway, 3. Development of<br />

novel molecular tools for genetic manipulation of algae, 4. Advancement of molecular algae viral<br />

pathogenesis, 5. Development of nanobody tools for algae growth, harvesting and research.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 4 Criteria Score: 2<br />

See Overall Impressions text.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 5 Criteria Score: 4<br />

The project appears to have met some of its objectives (development of molecular tools, etc).<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 6 Criteria Score: 4<br />

A fair amount of data was presented.<br />

<strong>Reviewer</strong>: 7 Criteria Score: 3<br />

Data compared against a well defiend criteria to measure progress were not presented.<br />

Page 39 of 223

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!