Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →Filing growth compares 2021 (33 records) with 2024 (35) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 1,315 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
This landscape tracks patent activity at the intersection of microbial and recombinant fermentation and the media-engineering variables that determine yield and cost: carbon source, nitrogen source, trace elements, vitamin supply, osmolarity control and media sterilization. The scope is defined by IPC classes covering fermentation and enzymatic synthesis (C12P), microorganism and genetic engineering work (C12N15/09) and bioreactor apparatus (C12M1/00), so it captures both the biological process claims and the hardware used to run them.
The dataset spans 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off and holds 1,315 published records. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one to two years are undercounted and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling, on actual filing activity.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 1,315-record corpus: filings by year, and the IPC subclasses those filings carry. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the class shares below sum to more than 100% of records.
Filings peaked at 106 in 2017 and declined through the early 2020s before firming up: 2021 filings (33) grew to 35 by 2024, a +6% rise over that three-year window. 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a downturn.
C12P (fermentation and enzymatic synthesis) touches 76.7% of the 1,315 records, confirming this as a process-claim-heavy field. C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) and C12M (bioreactors and apparatus) follow closely at 57.1% and 53.2%, showing that strain engineering and hardware claims are filed together as often as separately. Smaller shares in A23L (foods) at 5.8% and A23K (animal feed) at 5.6% mark where fermentation media work is starting to reach downstream product categories.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,315 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about precision fermentation media optimization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe present invention describes a microbial fermentation process using a fermentation medium comprising a complex nitrogen source, wherein a substantial part of the nitrogen supplied by the complex nitrogen source is provided by faba bean meal. The use of faba bean meal has a viscosity lowering effect as compared to the use of a complex nitrogen source other than faba bean meal.Filed by DSM IP Assets B.V., published 2008-02-28 — illustrates how a single substitution in the nitrogen-source formulation is claimed as a distinct process improvement.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO1992022324A1 | Microbially-produced antibody fragments and their conjugates | 1,588 |
| 2 | US6022725A | Cloning and amplification of the beta -glucosidase gene of Trichoderma reesei | 874 |
| 3 | WO1998046772A2 | Gene conversion as a tool for the construction of recombinant industrial filamentous fungi | 501 |
| 4 | WO2003027306A2 | BGL3 beta−glucosidase and nucleic acids encoding the same | 436 |
| 5 | EP0361991A2 | Method for the microbiological preparation of human serum albumin and other heterologous proteins from a yeast | 428 |
| 6 | WO2003052118A2 | BGL4 beta-glucosidase and nucleic acids encoding the same | 427 |
| 7 | WO2003052054A2 | BGL5 beta-glucosidase and nucleic acids encoding the same | 422 |
| 8 | WO2008151149A2 | Production of oil in microorganisms | 392 |
| 9 | US5830716A | Increased amounts of substances by modifying a microorganism to increase production of NADPH from NADH | 345 |
| 10 | US5789210A | Recombinant yeasts for effective fermentation of glucose and xylose | 229 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate references — treat this table as a map of influential prior art, not a ranking of current relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →Three patterns stand out once filing counts, IPC composition and assignee concentration are read together.
The top 5 assignees combine for 28.1% of all records and the top 10 for 37.6% — meaningful concentration, but well short of a closed field. Over 60% of records sit outside the ten most active filers, spread across the ranked leaders and beyond.
After the 2017 peak of 106 filings, activity cooled before edging back up: 33 filings in 2021 rose to 35 in 2024. That is a real, if small, resumption of filing interest rather than a field in decline.
C12P fermentation claims appear in 76.7% of records while C12M bioreactor/apparatus claims appear in 53.2% — a large overlap that suggests most serious filers are claiming the process and the equipment together rather than licensing one and building the other.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to precision fermentation media optimization, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Genencor International Inc. | YAO JIAN | 10 |
| Genencor International Inc. | WARD MICHAEL | 10 |
| Genencor International Inc. | GOEDEGEBUUR FRITS | 10 |
| Genencor International Inc. | DUNN COLEMAN NIGEL | 10 |
| LanzaTech New Zealand Ltd. | SCHULTZ MICHAEL ANTHONY | 9 |
| LanzaTech New Zealand Ltd. | LANZATECH NZ INC | 8 |
| LanzaTech New Zealand Ltd. | DBT IOC CENT FOR ADVANCED BIO ENERGY RES | 5 |
| LanzaTech New Zealand Ltd. | RAISER THOMAS EWALD | 3 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest recurring pairings involve named inventors alongside a single corporate assignee — evidence that most filings here are made by a sole owner rather than through joint ventures or research consortia.
The ranking covers 100 companies across the 1,315 records in scope. The leader holds 105 records; by fifth place that figure has fallen to 46, and by tenth place to 24 — a steep drop-off that points to one clear front-runner followed by a wide, thinning field.
The leading assignee holds more than double the fifth-place total, a gap consistent with a company that has built out a broad fermentation platform (gas fermentation and related process IP) rather than filing opportunistically around single products.
Filing counts fall from 46 at fifth place to 24 at tenth, showing that beyond the very top the field is competitive rather than dominated — no single runner-up has built a comparable position.
Several of the most historically active assignees show zero filings in the latest year, including entities with -100% year-on-year change. This is consistent with publication lag rather than necessarily an exit, but it means recent competitive signal should be read cautiously.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| LanzaTech New Zealand Ltd. | 0 | — |
| LanzaTech Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Genencor International Inc. | 0 | — |
| Calysta Inc. | 0 | — |
| LANZATECH NZ INC | 0 | — |
| Purdue Research Foundation | 0 | — |
| Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Sweetwater Energy Inc. | 0 | — |
The landscape points to where claim space is dense and where it is thin. The next step is usually narrower: checking a specific formulation idea against the filings that already exist.
Run a targeted search against the carbon-source, nitrogen-source or trace-element claims closest to your own formulation before committing R&D spend.
Explore in Eureka →Follow how the top-ranked assignee's gas-fermentation and process IP is evolving, since it accounts for a disproportionate share of records in this corpus.
Set up monitoring in Eureka →Use the under-claimed sub-areas identified here as a starting point for drafting claims that avoid the densest prior art clusters.
Start drafting in Eureka →One assignee leads the ranked field with 105 records, more than double the fifth-place total of 46. That gap suggests a broad platform position built over multiple filings rather than a single breakthrough patent. Beyond the leader, filing counts taper quickly — by tenth place the count is down to 24 — so the rest of the field is competitive rather than dominated by a runner-up. The ranking covers 100 companies drawn from the 1,315 records in scope, so it reflects relative activity rather than an exhaustive list of every entity that has ever filed.
Filings peaked at 106 in 2017, the highest single year in the dataset, then declined before firming up again: 2021 saw 33 filings and 2024 saw 35, a +6% increase over that span. That is a modest resumption of growth rather than a sustained boom. Figures for 2025 and 2026 in the dataset are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so those years understate true filing activity and should not be read as a slowdown.
Fermentation and enzymatic synthesis claims under IPC class C12P appear in 76.7% of the 1,315 records, making it the dominant category by a wide margin. Microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N) follow at 57.1%, and bioreactor and apparatus claims (C12M) at 53.2%, with substantial overlap between the two. Smaller but present categories include separation processes, peptides and proteins, and downstream applications in foods and animal feed, each in the single-digit percentages of records.
The smallest IPC shares in this dataset point to relatively thin claim density in areas like foods (A23L, 5.8% of records) and animal feed (A23K, 5.6% of records) compared to the core fermentation and genetic engineering classes. Within the media-optimization variables themselves, osmolarity control, vitamin supply scheduling, and non-thermal sterilization methods show up far less often in the corpus than carbon- and nitrogen-source claims. These are reasonable starting points for a novelty search before drafting, though a full freedom-to-operate check requires searching the specific claim language rather than IPC shares alone.
Concentration is real but partial: the top 5 assignees combine for 28.1% of all 1,315 records, and the top 10 combine for 37.6%. That leaves close to two-thirds of records held outside the ten most active filers, spread across the remaining ranked leaders and smaller entrants. Co-filing is uncommon in this space too — only 10 co-assignee pairs appear across the entire dataset — which indicates most organizations are filing independently rather than through joint ventures.
Go past this page: query the whole precision fermentation media optimization corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company's registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.