| Literature DB >> 25392801 |
Kandasamy Saravanakumar1, Kandasamy Kathiresan1.
Abstract
In the present study, a marine strain of Trichoderma sp was used for degradation of a synthetic dye,Entities:
Keywords: FTIR; Hypocrea lixii; Malachite green; Mangroves; Marine Trichoderma; SEM
Year: 2014 PMID: 25392801 PMCID: PMC4221560 DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Experimental design (CCD) of response surface methodology
| Std runs | (A) temperature (°C) | (B) pH | (C) yeast extract (g L -1) | (D) incubation period (days) | % of dye degradation | Laccase production (UmL -1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | Predicted | Experimental | Predicted | |||||
| 1.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.20 | 0.82 | 0.02 | 0.22 |
| 2.0 | 40.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.50 | 2.61 | 0.03 | 0.11 |
| 3.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.60 | 2.23 | 0.02 | 0.14 |
| 4.0 | 40.0 | 11.0 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 1.20 | 4.43 | 0.01 | 0.22 |
| 5.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 9.0 | 0.0 | 0.20 | 0.44 | 0.20 | 0.15 |
| 6.0 | 40.0 | 3.0 | 9.0 | 0.0 | 1.20 | 2.77 | 0.32 | 0.05 |
| 7.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | 9.0 | 0.0 | 1.20 | 2.14 | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| 8.0 | 40.0 | 11.0 | 9.0 | 0.0 | 3.50 | 4.87 | 0.02 | 0.66 |
| 9.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 15.0 | 87.71 | 93.26 | 2.71 | 2.85 |
| 10.0 | 40.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 15.0 | 87.01 | 94.76 | 2.01 | 2.23 |
| 11.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | 5.0 | 15.0 | 87.74 | 94.87 | 2.74 | 2.97 |
| 12.0 | 40.0 | 11.0 | 5.0 | 15.0 | 86.80 | 96.78 | 1.80 | 2.76 |
| 13.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 9.0 | 15.0 | 87.15 | 92.61 | 2.15 | 2.20 |
| 14.0 | 40.0 | 3.0 | 9.0 | 15.0 | 86.45 | 94.64 | 1.45 | 2.11 |
| 15.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | 9.0 | 15.0 | 86.70 | 94.50 | 1.70 | 2.61 |
| 16.0 | 40.0 | 11.0 | 9.0 | 15.0 | 87.87 | 96.94 | 2.87 | 2.92 |
| 17.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.39 | 78.25 | 3.39 | 2.92 |
| 18.0 | 55.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.45 | 72.64 | 3.45 | 2.58 |
| 19.0 | 25.0 | 1.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 86.54 | 76.42 | 1.54 | 1.53 |
| 20.0 | 25.0 | 15.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 87.17 | 72.55 | 2.17 | 1.10 |
| 21.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 7.5 | 88.99 | 78.89 | 3.99 | 3.51 |
| 22.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 11.0 | 7.5 | 88.89 | 78.67 | 3.89 | 3.29 |
| 23.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 87.55 | 86.98 | 2.55 | 3.19 |
| 24.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 22.5 | 87.24 | 66.93 | 2.24 | 1.16 |
| 25.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.90 | 86.98 | 3.90 | 3.19 |
| 26.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.90 | 86.98 | 3.90 | 3.19 |
| 27.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.90 | 86.98 | 3.90 | 3.19 |
| 28.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.90 | 86.98 | 3.90 | 3.19 |
| 29.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 88.90 | 86.98 | 3.90 | 3.19 |
| 30.0 | 25.0 | 7.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 86.74 | 86.98 | 1.74 | 3.19 |
Figure 1Effects of Hypocrea lixii on dye decolouration (a) conical flasks; (b) UV- absorption spectrum.
Analysis of variance table (ANOVA) for response surface methodology of main effects and interacting effects of parameters in quadratic model for the dye degradation by
| Source | Sum of squares | df | Mean square | F value | p-value Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 42482.83 | 14 | 3034.488 | 20.09046 | < 0.0001*** |
| X1-Temperature (°C) | 22.77126 | 1 | 22.77126 | 0.150762 | 0.7033NS |
| X2-pH | 18.41882 | 1 | 18.41882 | 0.121946 | 0.007318** |
| X3-Yeast extract (g L-1) | 0.069738 | 1 | 0.069738 | 0.000462 | 0.9831NS |
| X4-Incubation period (days) | 36055.94 | 1 | 36055.94 | 238.7159 | < 0.0001*** |
| X1X2 | 0.16657 | 1 | 0.16657 | 0.001103 | 0.009739** |
| X1X3 | 0.278689 | 1 | 0.278689 | 0.001845 | 0.9663NS |
| X1X4 | 0.085404 | 1 | 0.085404 | 0.000565 | 0.9813NS |
| X2X3 | 0.081467 | 1 | 0.081467 | 0.000539 | 0.009818** |
| X2X4 | 0.040612 | 1 | 0.040612 | 0.000269 | 0.9871NS |
| X3X4 | 0.075826 | 1 | 0.075826 | 0.000502 | 0.9824NS |
| X1 2 | 298.9977 | 1 | 298.9977 | 1.979577 | 0.1798NS |
| X2 2 | 320.0991 | 1 | 320.0991 | 2.119283 | 0.1661NS |
| X3 2 | 118.8562 | 1 | 118.8562 | 0.786912 | 0.3890NS |
| X4 2 | 12614.69 | 1 | 12614.69 | 83.51817 | < 0.0001*** |
| Residual | 2265.618 | 15 | 151.0412 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 1851.681 | 9 | 205.7423 | 2.982222 | 0.0984NS |
| Pure Error | 413.9376 | 6 | 68.9896 | ||
| Cor Total | 44748.45 | 29 |
Statistically significant ***(P <0.0001), **(P < 0.01), NS Non-significant.
Analysis of variance table (ANOVA) for response surface methodology of main effects and interacting effects of parameters in quadratic model for the laccase production by
| Source | Sum of squares | df | Mean | F value | p-value Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 48.56277 | 14 | 3.468769 | 2.621997 | 0.0371* |
| X1-Temperature (°C) | 0.000179 | 1 | 0.000179 | 0.000136 | 0.0009*** |
| X2-pH | 0.717105 | 1 | 0.717105 | 0.54205 | 0.00729** |
| X3-Yeast extract (g L-1) | 0.069738 | 1 | 0.069738 | 0.052714 | 0.8215NS |
| X4-Incubation period (days) | 25.37625 | 1 | 25.37625 | 19.18158 | 0.0005*** |
| X1X2 | 0.16657 | 1 | 0.16657 | 0.125908 | 0.7277NS |
| X1X3 | 0.278689 | 1 | 0.278689 | 0.210657 | 0.6528NS |
| X1X4 | 0.085404 | 1 | 0.085404 | 0.064556 | 0.8029 NS |
| X2X3 | 0.081467 | 1 | 0.081467 | 0.06158 | 0.8074 NS |
| X2X4 | 0.040612 | 1 | 0.040612 | 0.030698 | 0.8633 NS |
| X3X4 | 0.075826 | 1 | 0.075826 | 0.057316 | 0.8140 NS |
| X1 2 | 0.395835 | 1 | 0.395835 | 0.299206 | 0.5924 NS |
| X2 2 | 7.268732 | 1 | 7.268732 | 5.494339 | 0.0333* |
| X3 2 | 0.080502 | 1 | 0.080502 | 0.06085 | 0.8085 NS |
| X4 2 | 19.98253 | 1 | 19.98253 | 15.10453 | 0.0015** |
| Residual | 19.84424 | 15 | 1.322949 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 6.769842 | 9 | 0.752205 | 0.345196 | 0.9261NS |
| Pure Error | 13.0744 | 6 | 2.179066 | ||
| Cor Total | 68.40701 | 29 |
Statistically significant ***(P <0.0001), **(P < 0.01), *(P < 0.05), NS Non-significant.
Figure 2Effect of culture conditions on dye degradation (a) standard error plot for the response of dye degradation and laccase production, (b) predicted and actual response of the dye degradation by , (c) Normal probability, (d) significant interactive effect of pH and temperature, (e) significant effect of the yeast extract and pH, (f) optimization of the dye degradation of perturbation plot.
Figure 3Effect of the factors on laccase production by (a) Normal probability plot for laccase production (b) Regression of predicted and actual response of laccase production by
Figure 4Interactive effect of the culture conditions (a) effect of the pH and temperature, (b) effect of incubation period and temperature, (c) effect of yeast extract and pH, (d) effect of the incubation period and pH, (e) effect of the incubation period and yeast extract on laccase production, and (f) optimization of the laccase production of perturbation plot.
Figure 5SDS-PAGE patterns of purified laccaseof culture extract. (SDS-PAGE carried out using 5% polyacrylamide gel containing 0.1% SDS, and stained with 0.1% Coomassie brilliant blue R-250 after electrophoresis. Lane 1- Marker, molecular weight marker; lane 2 – Laccase from H. lixii).
Figure 6FT-IR representation of dye degradation (a) before dye degradation (b) after dye degradation.
Figure 7Scanning electron microscopic representation of the dye degradation (a) Control untreated spores (50 μm), (b) dye treated spores (50 μm).
Figure 8Effect of toxicity of degraded and undegraded dye solution on culture.