4.6 Article

Promoting Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 Harvesting by Cationic Surfactants: Alkyl-Chain Length and Dose Control for the Release of Extracellular Polymeric Substances and Biomass Aggregation

期刊

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
卷 7, 期 2, 页码 2127-2133

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b04776

关键词

Synechocystis; Biomass harvesting; Cationic surfactants; Flow cytometry; Cyanobacteria

资金

  1. LightWorks, Arizona State University
  2. Shanghai Tongji Gao Tingyao Environmental Science & Technology Development Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Development of an efficient biomass-harvesting technology for microalgae would achieve cost and energy savings in large-scale microalgae biomass cultivation. Cationic surfactants could improve biomass harvesting, but determining the optimal type and dose of surfactant requires mechanistic understanding. In this study, we evaluated how the alkyl-chain length and dose of three cationic surfactants hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), myristyltrimethylammonium bromide (MTAB), and dodecyltrimethylammonium bromide (DTAB) affected biomass harvesting of Synechocystis. Flow cytometry (FC) with the nucleic-acid (NA) stain SYTOX Green (SG) was used to differentiate the release of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) from cell lysis. All selected cationic surfactants dramatically improved the biomass-harvesting efficiency, and harvesting kinetics were represented well with a first-order kinetic model. The efficiency of biomass harvesting correlated positively with the alkyl-chain length; i.e., CTAB > MTAB > DTAB. A longer alkyl chain increased EPS release, which made it easier to achieve a less-negative zeta potential but without cell lysis. For CTAB, the largest cationic surfactant tested, a dose of 4.5 mM and treatment for 60 min achieved the maximum harvesting efficiency of similar to 91%. This work lays the foundation for optimizing surfactant species and dose for biomass harvesting.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据