4.7 Review

Consortia of cyanobacteria/microalgae and bacteria: Biotechnological potential

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY ADVANCES
卷 29, 期 6, 页码 896-907

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.07.009

关键词

Consortia; Cyanobacteria/microalgae; Bacteria; Pollutant removal; Organic pollutants; Metals; Nutrient removal

资金

  1. UniSA
  2. CRC CARE
  3. Government of Australia (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial metabolites are of huge biotechnological potential and their production can be coupled with detoxification of environmental pollutants and wastewater treatment mediated by the versatile microorganisms. The consortia of cyanobacteria/microalgae and bacteria can be efficient in detoxification of organic and inorganic pollutants, and removal of nutrients from wastewaters, compared to the individual microorganisms. Cyanobacterial/algal photosynthesis provides oxygen, a key electron acceptor to the pollutant-degrading heterotrophic bacteria. In turn, bacteria support photoautotrophic growth of the partners by providing carbon dioxide and other stimulatory means. Competition for resources and cooperation for pollutant abatement between these two guilds of microorganisms will determine the success of consortium engineering while harnessing the biotechnological potential of the partners. Relative to the introduction of gene(s) in a single organism wherein the genes depend on the regulatory- and metabolic network for proper expression, microbial consortium engineering is easier and achievable. The currently available biotechnological tools such as metabolic profiling and functional genomics can aid in the consortium engineering. The present review examines the current status of research on the consortia, and emphasizes the construction of consortia with desired partners to serve a dual mission of pollutant removal and commercial production of microbial metabolites. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
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