4.6 Article

A two-stage oxygen supply strategy for enhanced L-arginine production by Corynebacterium crenatum based on metabolic fluxes analysis

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 41-51

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2008.08.007

关键词

Amino acids; Arginine production; Corynebacterium crenatum; Dissolved oxygen; Fermentation; Metabolite over production

资金

  1. Programs for NewCentury Excellent Talents in University [NCET-07-0380]
  2. National Basic Research Program (973 Program) [2007CB707800]
  3. National High-Tech Programs of China [2006AA020104, 2006AA020301, 2007AA02Z207]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the metabolic flux distribution analysis of a new L-arginine (Arg) overproducing strain, Corynebacterium crenatum, was carried out under various oxygen Supply conditions in order to explore the optimized oxygen supply profile. The metabolic flux analysis indicated that a relatively higher L-arginine production could be obtained under high Oxygen Supply (HOS) condition overall. However, during the late fermentation phases, a much more stable L-arginine production could be rather achieved under medium oxygen supply (MOS) condition. As a result, a two-stage oxygen Supply strategy, which maintained HOS condition during early fermentation phase. and then step-wisely reduced agitation to keep a stable, smooth and moderate dissolve oxygen levels (DO) changing profile throughout the production phases, was proposed. With the proposed control strategy. the final L-arginine concentration of the batch fermentation was largely increased and reached to a high level of 36.6 g L-1, which was 16% and 51% higher than those obtained under the HOS and MOS conditions. The two-stage oxygen supply strategy could also accelerate glucose consumption rate and thus shorten fermentation time under the same batch initial fermentation condition. The relevant metabolic flux analysis verified the effectiveness of the Proposed control strategy. (C) 2008 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

4.6
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