4.7 Article

Use of Response Surface Methodology in optimization of biomass, lipid productivity and fatty acid profiles of marine microalga Dunaliella parva for biodiesel production

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2021.101485

关键词

Biochemical compounds; Biodiesel; Biomass and Lipid productivity; Dunaliella parva; Fatty acid composition; Response Surface Methodology

资金

  1. Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia [TURSP-2020/200]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study optimized the growth medium for marine microalga Dunaliella parva to enhance biomass and lipid productivity, making it a potential alternative source for the production of high-quality biodiesel.
In order to reduce fossil fuel consumption, renewable energy sources such as algal biomass have attracted more interest for the production of biodiesel as an energy source. In the current study, marine microalga Dunaliella parva was mainly assessed for higher biomass productivity, lipid content and productivity by the optimization of growth medium with Response Surface Methodology (RSM) for production of biodiesel. Other biochemical compounds such as carbohydrates, proteins and free amino acids content and productivity were also evaluated by RSM. Maximum biomass productivity, lipid content and productivity (48.59 mg/L/day, 39.08 % and 19.91 mg/L/day, respectively) was attained by RSM optimized medium containing 0.63 g/L nitrogen, 0.02 g/L phosphorus and 1.61 M NaCl, which are 1.2, 1.5 and 1.4 folds, respectively, higher than normal growth medium and agreed well with the predicted value (49.85 mg/L/day, 37.51 % and 19.49 mg/L/day). In addition, saturated fatty acids increased from 42.8 % to 59.7%, polyunsaturated fatty acids decreased from 54.9% to 40.3% and the biodiesel properties almost complied with international standards, ASTM D6751 and EN 14214 under optimized conditions. Thus, D. parva has potential as an alternative source for the biodiesel production of excellent quality. (C) 2021 Elsevier B.V. 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