4.5 Article

Volumetric oxygen transfer coefficient as a means of improving volumetric ethanol productivity and a criterion for scaling up ethanol production with Escherichia coli

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.5087

关键词

Escherichia coli; glucose; scale-up; volumetric ethanol productivity; volumetric oxygen transfer coefficient; xylose

资金

  1. Mexican Council of Science and Technology (CONACyT) through the Bioenergy Thematic Network ('Red Mexicana de Bioenergia') [260457]
  2. FONCICYT ERANet-LAC [C0013-248192]
  3. CONACyT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the influence of different micro-aerated conditions, including the aeration rate, the volumetric oxygen transfer coefficient (k(L)a) and the oxygen transfer rate (OTR), on improving ethanol productivity and scale-up of the fermentation step of the ethanologenic Escherichia coli strain MS04 in mineral medium supplemented with xylose, glucose, and sodium acetate. RESULTS: Growth and ethanol production results using 0.75 L of fermenter showed that micro-aeration (0.1 vvm, 400 rpm) improved the volumetric ethanol productivity and sugar consumption rate compared with the anaerobic condition (0 vvm, 400 rpm) or higher aeration rates (>0.2 vvm) without reducing significantly the ethanol yield. The k(L)a and the OTR were estimated and a k(L)a value of 7.2 h(-1) was used as a criterion to scale-up the fermentation process from 0.75 L to 9.16 L and 110 L. During scale-up, the volumetric ethanol productivity and ethanol yield of consumed sugars were maintained at similar levels to those obtained in the laboratory in the 0.75 L fermenter. CONCLUSIONS: The controlled supply of low levels of oxygen promoted an increase in the concentration of biomass favoring the production and volumetric productivity of ethanol. The use of k(L)a allowed the fermentation step to be scaled up with ethanologenic E. coli maintaining similar ethanol yields and productivities. (C) 2016 Society of Chemical Industry

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