4.7 Article

Effect of surfactants on the production and biofunction of Tremella fuciformis polysaccharide through submerged fermentation

期刊

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 163, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2022.113602

关键词

Tremella fuciformis spore; Exopolysaccharide; Surfactant; Fermentation kinetics; Antioxidant activity

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2019YFA09005203]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [22178177]
  3. China Post-doctoral Science Foundation [2020M681571]
  4. Jiangsu Synergetic Innovation Center for Advanced Bio-Manufacture [XTD2201]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the promoting effect of Span 80 on substrate transfer and TFPS production. The results showed that the addition of 0.3% Span 80 significantly increased the yield of TFPS. Span 80 improved the permeability of cell membrane, facilitated TFPS secretion, and enhanced its antioxidant activity.
Tremella fuciformis polysaccharide (TFPS) have been widely used in the fields of food and medicine due to their multiple functions. submerged cultivation of mushroom is viewed as a promising alternative for efficient production of TFPS. Here, span 80 promoting the transfer of substrates and TFPS production were studied. The TFPS yield with addition of 0.3 % (v/v) span 80 in the culture reached 10.56 +/- 0.53 g/L, which was 22.51 % higher than that of the control group. In a 7.5 L fermenter with glucose fed-batch strategy, the TFPS yield reached 25.94 +/- 0.53 g/L. Span 80 improved the permeability of cell membrane and facilitated the secretion of TFPS. Furthermore, the glucuronic acid content of TFPS from Span 80 containing medium increased to 15.44 +/- 0.15 %, and exhibited stronger antioxidant activity against DPPH center dot and center dot OH radicals. This study provided further evidence for elucidating the promoting effect of span 80 in submerged fermentation and guidance for the production of TFPS from T. fuciformis spore.

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