4.7 Article

Microbial lipid production by oleaginous yeast Cryptococcus sp in the batch cultures using corncob hydrolysate as carbon source

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 72, 期 -, 页码 95-103

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.11.012

关键词

Cryptococcus sp.; Corncob hydrolysates; Microbial lipid; Batch culture; Biodiesel

资金

  1. National Science Council of the Republic of China (Taiwan) [NSC 97-2313-B-264-001-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To realize the feasibility of biodiesel production from high-lipid cell culture, microbial lipid production by the oleaginous yeasts was studied using glucose and sucrose as carbon source. Among the tested strains, Cryptococcus sp. SM5S05 accumulated the highest levels of intracellular lipids. The crude lipid contents of Cryptococcus sp. cultured in yeast malt agar reached 30% on a dry weight basis. The accumulation of lipids strongly depended on carbon/nitrogen ratio and nitrogen concentration. The highest content of lipids, measured at a carbon/nitrogen ratio of 60-90 and at a nitrogen concentration of 0.2%, was 60-57% lipids in the dry biomass. Batch cultures using corncob hydrolysate demonstrated that there was minimal inhibitory effect with a reducing sugar concentration of 60 g l(-1) or higher. Batch cultures of Cryptococcus sp. SM5S05 in the corncob hydrolysate medium with 60 g l(-1) glucose resulted in a dry biomass, lipid yields, and content of 12.6 g l(-1), 7.6 g l(-1), and 60.2%, respectively. The lipids contained mainly long-chain saturated and unsaturated fatty acids with 16 and 18 carbon atoms. The fatty acid profile of Cryptococcus oils was quite similar to that of conventional vegetable oil. The cost of lipid production could be further reduced with corncob hydrolysate being utilized as the raw material for the oleaginous yeast. The results showed that the microbial lipid from Cryptococcus sp. was a potential alternative resource for biodiesel production. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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