4.7 Article

Use of exogenous substrate in Chlorella cultivation: Strategy for biomass and polyhydroxybutyrate production

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.123193

关键词

Exogenous carbon; Chlorella; Polyhydroxybutyrate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of exogenous carbon supplementation and nitrogen source reduction on Chlorella fusca LEB 111 growth, biomass composition, and polyhydroxybutyrate accumulation. The experiments showed that a 25% reduction in NaNO3 and supplementation with 10 mg L-1 D-xylose had a positive effect on the biomass productivity of C. fusca LEB 111, with production as high as 354.4 mg L-1 d-1. The maximum concentration of PHB extracted from C. fusca LEB 111 was 3.7% (w w-1) and was obtained when the microalgae were cultivated with a 25% reduction in NaNO3 and supplementation of D-xylose at 20 mg L-1.
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of exogenous carbon supplementation and nitrogen source reduction on Chlorella fusca LEB 111 growth, biomass composition, and polyhydroxybutyrate accumulation. First, assays were performed with 50 % and 25 % reduced nitrogen source concentrations (NaNO3). In the second stage, the influence of culture supplementation with 10, 20, and 30 mg L-1 D-xylose, associated with 50 and 25 % reductions in NaNO3, was evaluated. The experiments conducted with a 25 % reduction in NaNO3 and sup-plementation with 10 mg L-1 D-xylose resulted in a positive effect on the biomass productivity of C. fusca LEB 111, with production as high as 354.4 mg L-1 d-1. The maximum concentration of PHB extracted from C. fusca LEB 111 was 3.7 % (w w-1) and was obtained when the microalgae were cultivated with a 25 % of reduction in NaNO3 and supplementation of D-xylose at 20 mg L-1. Therefore, this study brings new perspectives regarding reducing the use of nutritional sources and using exogenous carbon sources in using microalgae to produce molecules of high biotechnological potential.

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