4.5 Review

Red yeasts and carotenoid production: outlining a future for non-conventional yeasts of biotechnological interest

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 11, Pages 1665-1673

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11274-015-1927-x

Keywords

Basidiomycetous yeast; Carotenoid analysis; Flow cytometry; -omic tools; Transformation

Funding

  1. Regione Autonoma della Sardegna [LR7/07-2010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Carotenoids are one of the most common classes of pigments that occur in nature. Due to their biological properties, they are widely used in phytomedicine and in the chemical, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, food and feed industries. Accordingly, their global market is continuously growing, and it is expected to reach about US$1.4 billion in 2018. Carotenoids can be easily produced by chemical synthesis, although their biotechnological production is rapidly becoming an appealing alternative to the chemical route, partly due to consumer concerns against synthetic pigments. Among the yeasts, and apart from the pigmented species Phaffia rhodozyma (and its teleomorph Xanthophyllomyces dendrorhous), a handful of species of the genera Rhodosporidium, Rhodotorula, Sporobolomyces and Sporidiobolus are well known carotenoid producers. These are known as 'red yeasts', and their ability to synthesize mixtures of carotenoids from low-cost carbon sources has been broadly studied recently. Here, in agreement with the renewed interest in microbial carotenoids, the recent literature is reviewed regarding the taxonomy of the genera Rhodosporidium, Rhodotorula, Sporobolomyces and Sporidiobolus, the stress factors that influence their carotenogenesis, and the most advanced analytical tools for evaluation of carotenoid production. Moreover, a synopsis of the molecular and -omic tools available for elucidation of the metabolic pathways of the microbial carotenoids is reported.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available