Reviewer Comments - EERE

2011 Algae Platform Review – Reviewer Comments
Reviewer Comments are direct transcripts of commentary and material provided by the Platform’s
Review Panel. They have not been edited or altered by the Biomass Program.
Progress 7.43 1.40 7
Relevance 6.71 1.67 7
Critical Success Factors 7.43 1.29 7
1. Project Approach
The project performers have implemented technically sound research, development, and deployment
approaches and demonstrated necessary results to meet their targets
The project performers have identified a project management plan that includes well-defined milestones
and adequate methods for addressing potential risks.
Reviewer Comments
Reviewer: 1 Criteria Score: 7
The organization of the work seems to be very focused. Tasks are layed out in a very sequenced fashion.
There are some questions that the investigator should address even for this exploratory project. Baseline
oil production performance and how it compares to algae is one example. How does it fit with the OBP
algae program and deliverables is another? Overall, this will be a contributory exploratory program.
Reviewer: 2 Criteria Score: 7
This project's goals are basic science aspects of the Roadmap to understand TAG production under silicon
versus nitrogen limitation, understand genes involved in control points for carbon flux, and develop
genetic tools (including transformation and knockdowns with RNAi, too) for manipulation in diatoms.
Thalassiosira pseudonana and Cyclotella cryptica are the key targets and the PI suggests that what is
learned in these systems can be transferred to most other diatom biofuels' targets.
Reviewer: 3 Criteria Score: 8
By characterizing gene expression changes using transcriptomics, fundamental aspects of carbon flux and
partitioning can be elucidated, providing gene targets for metabolic engineering.
Reviewer: 4 Criteria Score: 10
See Overall Impressions text.
Reviewer: 5 Criteria Score: 7
The overall goal is to perform metabolic engineering of diatoms for higher TAG content. The specific
goals are to compare transcriptional analyses of two diatoms, identify targets for engineering, and then
engineer improved diatom strains. The science is very sound and was well presented.
Reviewer: 6 Criteria Score: 7
For what it is—a largely academic approach—it's a very solid approach. It lacks a basis for supporting
realistic commercial growth of microalgae, i.e wild and native mixed cultures, but will provide very good
scientific knowledge and advance our general understanding of diatom metabolism with respect to lipid
biosynthesis.
Reviewer: 7 Criteria Score: 7
Although the approach is fundamental research, a baseline and commercial goals for productivity and
yield would help calibrate the project.
Page 56 of 223