4.5 Article

Co-production of lipid, exopolysaccharide and single-cell protein by Sporidiobolus pararoseus under ammonia nitrogen-limited conditions

期刊

BIOPROCESS AND BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING
卷 43, 期 8, 页码 1403-1414

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00449-020-02335-3

关键词

Sporidiobolus pararoseus JD-2; Ammonia nitrogen-limited; Microbial lipid; Exopolysaccharide; Single-cell protein

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31601459]
  2. Science and Technology support Program of Jiangsu Province [BE2018316]
  3. Top-Notch Academic Programs Project of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the rapid depletion of crude resources, microorganism lipids have started attracting increasing attention because of their renewable qualities. However, their production is limited by high costs. In this study, we aimed to reduce the production cost of Sporidiobolus pararoseus JD-2 lipid by co-producing extracellular polysaccharide (EPS) and single-cell protein (SCP). In batch fermentation, the yields of lipid, EPS and SCP under ammonia nitrogen limitation increased by 20.3%, 32.0% and 43.7%, respectively, compared with the yields in the control group (without NH4+). Next, fed-batch fermentation was performed under different ammonia nitrogen levels. The yield, productivity and coefficient of lipid reached 47.1 +/- 1.1 g/L, 0.66 g/L/h and 0.250 g/g, respectively, under an ammonia nitrogen level of 20 g/L (NH4)(2)SO4. In the same process, 14.3 +/- 1.6 g/L EPS and 12.7 +/- 0.8 g/L SCP were also obtained. Nutrient analysis of the product revealed that NH4+ affected the proportion of pigments in the carotenoids and increased the content of unsaturated fatty acids in the lipid; EPS mainly comprised galactose, glucose, mannose and fucose, at a ratio of approximately 45:37:2:1; and the essential amino acid content in SCP accounted for 48% of the product. Thus, this study provided a new strategy for improving S. pararoseus JD-2 lipid production at a lower cost.

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

4.5
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