4.7 Article

Fucoxanthin production from Tisochrysis lutea and Phaeodactylum tricornutum at industrial scale

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.algal.2021.102322

Keywords

Phaeodactylum tricornutum; Tisochrysis lutea; Industrial production; Fucoxanthin

Funding

  1. Bio Based Industries Joint Undertaking under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [745754]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study produced two marine microalgae to evaluate biomass and fucoxanthin production, demonstrating the potential for fucoxanthin production from microalgae.
Fucoxanthin is a xanthophyll carotenoid with high market value. Currently, seaweeds are the primary source for fucoxanthin industrial production. However, marine microalgae reach 5 to 10 times higher concentrations (2.24 to 26.6 mg g-1 DW) and are considered a promising feedstock. In this work, two marine microalgae were produced at industrial scale to evaluate biomass and fucoxanthin production: Phaeodactylum tricornutum for autumn/winter and Tisochrysis lutea for spring/summer. Both strains were grown in 15 m3 tubular flow-through photobioreactors; for 170 consecutive days of semi-continuous cultivation regime. The average volumetric biomass productivities of P. tricornutum and T. lutea were 0.11 and 0.09 g DW L-1 day-1. P. tricornutum reached higher maximum biomass concentration (2.87 g DW L-1) than T. lutea (1.47 g DW L-1). P. tricornutum fucoxanthin content ranged between 0.2 and 0.7% DW, while T. lutea between 0.2 and 0.6% DW. The fucoxanthin content was correlated with the irradiation (MJ m-2) and biomass concentration in the photobioreactor (g L-1). This is the first work in literature reporting a long-term industrial production of T. lutea. Overall, we showed possible scenarios for fucoxanthin production from microalgae, increasing the window to supply the industry with steady production throughout the year.

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