4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Photosynthetic performance of outdoor Nannochloropsis mass cultures under a wide range of environmental conditions

期刊

AQUATIC MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 56, 期 2-3, 页码 297-308

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/ame01309

关键词

Chlorophyll fluorescence; Photobioreactor; Nannochloropsis; Mass culture; Photosynthetic rate; Unfavorable conditions; Quantum yield

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The unicellular alga Nannochloropsis sp. (Eustigmatophyta) is a rich source of lipids, polyunsaturated fatty acids (such as eicosapentaenoic acid) and carotenoids (violaxanthin), which makes it valuable for human consumption, aquaculture and biofuel production. Mass production of Nannochloropsis sp. can be easily achieved in high-rate algal ponds (HRAP), in flat panel photobioreactors (FPP) or in tubular photobioreactors. While easy to operate, these systems are prone to unfavorable growth conditions, which affect productivity. In the present study, we cultivated Nannochloropsis sp. in 2 outdoor production systems and monitored photosynthetic activity. Unfavorable conditions (stressors), such as high temperature and high pH in combination with high irradiance, were induced in FPP, causing a substantial reduction in the photosynthetic rate. The measurements of Nannochloropsis sp. photosynthetic activity using several chlorophyll fluorescence techniques as well as oxygen production measurements showed that this species is able to withstand high irradiance levels. Although some photodamage due to high irradiance was found, the cultures rapidly recovered. Nannochloropsis sp. coped well with high pH conditions under physiological temperatures. However, a temperature rise above 32 degrees C was detrimental, with repair processes being unable to keep up with the rate of damage. The cultures in the FPP were more prone to damage by extreme temperatures than those in the HRAP due to the high surface:volume ratio, which complicated temperature regulation within the physiological range.

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

4.2
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