4.7 Article

Production of surfactin and fengycin by Bacillus subtilis in a bubbleless membrane bioreactor

Journal

APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 87, Issue 2, Pages 499-507

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00253-010-2504-8

Keywords

Bacillus subtilis; Surfactin; Fengycin; Bubbleless membrane bioreactor; Oxygen transfer; Adsorption

Funding

  1. Universite Lille 1 Sciences et Technologies
  2. Region Nord-Pas-deCalais
  3. Fonds European pour le Developpement de la Recherche
  4. Ministsre de l'Enseignement et de la Recherche

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Surfactin and fengycin are lipopeptide biosurfactants produced by Bacillus subtilis. This work describes for the first time the use of bubbleless bioreactors for the production of these lipopeptides by B. subtilis ATCC 21332 with aeration by a hollow fiber membrane air-liquid contactor to prevent foam formation. Three different configurations were tested: external aeration module made from either polyethersulfone (reactor BB1) or polypropylene (reactor BB2) and a submerged module in polypropylene (reactor BB3). Bacterial growth, glucose consumption, lipopeptide production, and oxygen uptake rate were monitored during the culture in the bioreactors. For all the tested membranes, the bioreactors were of satisfactory bacterial growth and lipopeptide production. In the three configurations, surfactin production related to the culture volume was in the same range: 242, 230, and 188 mg l(-1) for BB1, BB2, and BB3, respectively. Interestingly, high differences were observed for fengycin production: 47 mg l(-1) for BB1, 207 mg l(-1) for BB2, and 393 mg l(-1) for BB3. A significant proportion of surfactin was adsorbed on the membranes and reduced the volumetric oxygen mass transfer coefficient. The degree of adsorption depended on both the material and the structure of the membrane and was higher with the submerged polypropylene membrane.

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