194
N. Y. Quintero
A special comment arises here, related to two minimal microorganisms labelled
10 and 32; these species are genetically modified (Kulkarni et al. 2013; Appukuttan
et al. 2011). As expected from this biotechnological feature, they might have a
good U trapping potential due to their engineered cellular systems. However, their
positions as minimal microorganisms show that further studies are required for
improving their U uptake abilities in aqueous solution (Quintero et al. 2017).
3.3 Average Ranks Obtained from the Application of Ranking
Methodologies
LPOM0 and LPOMext ranking methods were applied to the microorganisms and
their attributes; the results are summarised in Table 2 (reprinted from Quintero
et al. 2018). Rank 1 means sought microorganisms and higher ranks less preferred
microorganisms. Note that information for the last ranks is not available, for there
are microorganisms having the same rank due to ties. These cases are highlighted
with an asterisk (Quintero et al. 2017, 2018). Likewise, in the columns showing
the average ranks for each ranking method, it is also included the label of each
microorganism in parenthesis.
Average ranks calculated by LPOM0 and LPOMext can be pretty different; as
a token of that, in Table 2 (Quintero et al. 2018) is shown that microorganisms
labelled 1, 9, 13, 25, 39, 83 and other ones differ in average ranks values calculated
by these two methods. In LPOM0, the number of all microorganisms under study
(X), the number of successors of x, (|S(x)|) and the number of incomparable objects
of x, I(x), are considered (Bruggemann and Carlsen 2011). Furthermore, in LPOM0
microorganisms y incomparable with a certain microorganism x are supposed
isolated (Bruggemann and Carlsen 2011). As seen, it is a simple method given
its mathematical structure that ignores connections between some objects in the
poset (Bruggemann et al. 2004). In contrast, LPOMext does consider connections
among microorganisms and for each microorganism y ∈ I(x), it is checked how
many positions are accessible above and below x (Bruggemann et al. 2004).
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Mathematical Interpretation from the HD and Average
Ranks
In Fig. 1 taken from Quintero et al. (2018) the existence of two components shows
that the microorganisms located in each of them are incomparable regarding the
organisms located on the other component. This incomparability results from the
existence of attributes with very high values that do not appear in organisms of
N. Y. Quintero
A special comment arises here, related to two minimal microorganisms labelled
10 and 32; these species are genetically modified (Kulkarni et al. 2013; Appukuttan
et al. 2011). As expected from this biotechnological feature, they might have a
good U trapping potential due to their engineered cellular systems. However, their
positions as minimal microorganisms show that further studies are required for
improving their U uptake abilities in aqueous solution (Quintero et al. 2017).
3.3 Average Ranks Obtained from the Application of Ranking
Methodologies
LPOM0 and LPOMext ranking methods were applied to the microorganisms and
their attributes; the results are summarised in Table 2 (reprinted from Quintero
et al. 2018). Rank 1 means sought microorganisms and higher ranks less preferred
microorganisms. Note that information for the last ranks is not available, for there
are microorganisms having the same rank due to ties. These cases are highlighted
with an asterisk (Quintero et al. 2017, 2018). Likewise, in the columns showing
the average ranks for each ranking method, it is also included the label of each
microorganism in parenthesis.
Average ranks calculated by LPOM0 and LPOMext can be pretty different; as
a token of that, in Table 2 (Quintero et al. 2018) is shown that microorganisms
labelled 1, 9, 13, 25, 39, 83 and other ones differ in average ranks values calculated
by these two methods. In LPOM0, the number of all microorganisms under study
(X), the number of successors of x, (|S(x)|) and the number of incomparable objects
of x, I(x), are considered (Bruggemann and Carlsen 2011). Furthermore, in LPOM0
microorganisms y incomparable with a certain microorganism x are supposed
isolated (Bruggemann and Carlsen 2011). As seen, it is a simple method given
its mathematical structure that ignores connections between some objects in the
poset (Bruggemann et al. 2004). In contrast, LPOMext does consider connections
among microorganisms and for each microorganism y ∈ I(x), it is checked how
many positions are accessible above and below x (Bruggemann et al. 2004).
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Mathematical Interpretation from the HD and Average
Ranks
In Fig. 1 taken from Quintero et al. (2018) the existence of two components shows
that the microorganisms located in each of them are incomparable regarding the
organisms located on the other component. This incomparability results from the
existence of attributes with very high values that do not appear in organisms of