4.5 Article

Pellet morphology, culture rheology and lovastatin production in cultures of Aspergillus terreus

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 116, 期 1, 页码 61-77

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2004.10.005

关键词

Aspergillus terreus; lovastatin; fungal morphology; broth rheology; pelleted growth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pellet growth of Aspergillus terreus ATCC 20542 in submerged batch fermentations in stirred bioreactors was used to examine the effects of agitation (impeller tip speed u(1) of 1.01-2.71 m s(-1)) and aeration regimens (air or an oxygen-enriched mixture containing 80% oxygen and 20% nitrogen by volume) on the fungal pellet morphology, broth rheology and lovastatin production. The agitation speed and aeration methods used did not affect the biomass production profiles, but significantly influenced pellet morphology, broth rheology and the lovastatin titers. Pellets of similar to1200 mum initial diameter were reduced to a final stable size of similar to900 mum when the agitation intensity was greater than or equal to600 rpm (u(t) greater than or equal to 2.03 m s(-1)). A stable pellet diameter of similar to2250 mum could be attained in less intensely agitated cultures. These large fluffy pellets produced high lovastatin titers when aerated with oxygen-enriched gas but not with air. Much smaller pellets obtained under highly agitated conditions did not attain high lovastatin productivity even in an oxygen-enriched atmosphere. This suggests that both an upper limit on agitation Intensity and a high level of dissolved oxygen are essential for attaining high titers of lovastatin. Pellet size in the bioreactor correlated equally well with the specific energy dissipation rate and the energy dissipation circulation function. The latter took into account the frequency of passage of the pellets through the high shear regions of the impellers. Pellets that gave high lovastatin titers produced highly shear thinning cultivation broths. (C) 2004 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

4.5
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