4.7 Article

Establishment of successive co-fermentation by Bacillus subtilis and Acetobacter pasteurianus for extracting chitin from shrimp shells

Journal

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
Volume 258, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.117720

Keywords

Chitin; Successive co-fermentation; Acetobacter pasteurianus; Deproteinization; Demineralization

Funding

  1. key Science and Technology Project of Hainan Province, China [ZDYF2019138]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, a process of chitin bio-extraction from shrimp shells powder was simplified by using successive co-fermentation with Bacillus subtilis and Acetobacter pasteurianus. The purified chitin obtained from this method showed excellent structural characteristics compared to commercial chitin, with high deacetylation degree and lower molecular weight.
To simplify the process of chitin bio-extraction from shrimp shells powder (SSP), successive co-fermentation using Bacillus subtilis and Acetobacter pasteurianus was explored in this work. Among three protease-producer (B. licheniformis, B. subtilis, and B. cereus), only B. subtilis exhibited high compatibility with A. pasteurianus in co-culture. Successive co-fermentation was constructed as follows: deproteinization was performed for 3 d by culturing B. subtilis in the medium containing 50 g.L-1 SSP, 50 g.L-1 glucose, and 1 g.L-1 yeast extracts; After feeding 5 g.L-1 KH2PO4 and 6 % (v/v) ethanol, A. pasteurianus was cultured for another 2 d without replacing and re-sterilizing medium. Through 5 d of fermentation, the final deproteinization, demineralization efficiency, and chitin yield reached 94.5 %, 92.0 %, and 18.0 %, respectively. This purified chitin had lower molecular weight (12.8 kDa) and higher deacetylation degree (19.6 %) compared with commercial chitin (18.5 kDa, 6.7 %), and showed excellent structural characterization of FESEM and FT-IR analysis.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available