4.6 Article

Decoupling production from growth by magnesium sulfate limitation boosts de novo limonene production

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 113, 期 6, 页码 1305-1314

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bit.25883

关键词

limonene; decoupling production from growth; resting cells; fermentation; industrial biotechnology; reaction engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The microbial production of isoprenoids has recently developed into a prime example for successful bottom-up synthetic biology or top-down systems biology strategies. Respective fermentation processes typically rely on growing recombinant microorganisms. However, the fermentative production of isoprenoids has to compete with cellular maintenance and growth for carbon and energy. Non-growing but metabolically active E. coli cells were evaluated in this study as alternative biocatalyst configurations to reduce energy and carbon loss towards biomass formation. The use of non-growing cells in an optimized fermentation medium resulted in more than fivefold increased specific limonene yields on cell dry weight and glucose, as compared to the traditional growing-cell-approach. Initially, the stability of the resting-cell activity was limited. This instability was overcome via the optimization of the minimal fermentation medium enabling high and stable limonene production rates for up to 8h and a high specific yield of 50mg limonene per gram cell dry weight. Omitting MgSO4 from the fermentation medium was very promising to prohibit growth and allow high productivities. Applying a MgSO4-limitation also improved limonene formation by growing cells during non-exponential growth involving a reduced biomass yield on glucose and a fourfold increase in specific limonene yields on biomass as compared to non-limited cultures. The control of microbial growth via the medium composition was identified as a key but yet underrated strategy for efficient isoprenoid production. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2016;113: 1305-1314. (c) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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