4.6 Article

Scale-up from shake flasks to fermenters in batch and continuous mode with Corynebacterium glutamicum in lactic acid based on oxygen transfer and pH

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 98, 期 4, 页码 800-811

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/bit.21359

关键词

Corynebacterium glutamicum; gas-liquid mass transfer; pH-modeling; scale-up; shake flask; volumetric mass transfer coefficient

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Scale-up from shake flasks to fermenters has been hampered by the lack of knowledge concerning the influence of operating conditions on mass transfer, hydromechanics, and power input. However, in recent years the properties of shake flasks have been described with empirical models. A practical scale-up strategy for everyday use is introduced for the scale-up of aerobic cultures from shake flasks to fermenters in batch and continuous mode. The strategy is based on empirical correlations of the volumetric mass transfer coefficient (k(L) a) and the pH. The accuracy of the empirical kL a correlations and the assumptions required to use these correlations for an arbitrary biological medium are discussed. To determine the optimal pH of the culture medium a simple laboratory method based on titration curves of the medium and a mechanistic pH model, which is solely based on the medium composition, is applied. The effectiveness of the scale-up strategy is demonstrated by comparing the behavior of Corynebacterium glutamicum on lactic acid in shake flasks and fermenters in batch and continuous mode. The maximum growth rate (mu(max) = 0.32 h(-1)) and the oxygen substrate coefficient (YO2/s = 0.0174 mol/1) of C. glutamicum on lactic acid were equal for shake flask, fermenter, batch, and continuous cultures. The biomass substrate yield was independent of the scale, but was lower in batch cultures (Y-X/S = 0.36 g/g) than in continuous cultures (Y-X/S = 0.45 g/g). The experimental data (biomass, respiration, pH) could be described with a simple biological model combined with a mechanistic pH model.

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

4.6
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