| Literature DB >> 25401067 |
Claire M Hull1, E Joel Loveridge1, Iain S Donnison2, Diane E Kelly1, Steven L Kelly1.
Abstract
Microbial biotechnology and biotransformations promise to diversify the scope of the biorefinery approach for the production of high-value products and biofuels from industrial, rural and municipal waste feedstocks. In addition to bio-based chemicals and metabolites, microbial biomass itself constitutes an obvious but overlooked by-product of existing biofermentation systems which warrants fuller attention. The probiotic yeast Saccharomyces boulardii is used to treat gastrointestinal disorders and marketed as a human health supplement. Despite its relatedness to S. cerevisiae that is employed widely in biotechnology, food and biofuel industries, the alternative applications of S. boulardii are not well studied. Using a biorefinery approach, we compared the bioethanol and biomass yields attainable from agriculturally-sourced grass juice using probiotic S. boulardii (strain MYA-769) and a commercial S. cerevisiae brewing strain (Turbo yeast). Maximum product yields for MYA-769 (39.18 [±2.42] mg ethanol mL(-1) and 4.96 [±0.15] g dry weight L(-1)) compared closely to those of Turbo (37.43 [±1.99] mg mL(-1) and 4.78 [±0.10] g L(-1), respectively). Co-production, marketing and/or on-site utilisation of probiotic yeast biomass as a direct-fed microbial to improve livestock health represents a novel and viable prospect for rural biorefineries. Given emergent evidence to suggest that dietary yeast supplementations might also mitigate ruminant enteric methane emissions, the administration of probiotic yeast biomass could also offer an economically feasible way of reducing atmospheric CH4.Entities:
Keywords: Bioethanol; Biomass; Biorefinery; Cholesterol; Probiotic; Saccharomyces boulardii
Year: 2014 PMID: 25401067 PMCID: PMC4230830 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-014-0064-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Figure 1Mean [±S.D] glucose, fructose and fructan concentrations in untreated GJ (open bars) and GJ + fosEp (filled bars).a Fructan = polyfructose.
Mean [±S.D] growth parameters for Turbo yeast and MYA-796 grown on enzyme-pretreated grass juice (GJ + fosEp)
| | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Δ | ||||||
| Turbo | 1.70 [0.02] | 11.25 [0.5] | 17.25 [0.5] | 3.5 [0.5] | 37.43 [1.99] | 4.78 [0.10] |
| MYA-796 | 1.74 [0.02] | 12.00 [0.5] | 20.25 [0.5] | 4.5 [0.5] | 39.18 [2.42] | 4.96 [0.15] |
ΔOD600 = maximum – minimum optical density reading (at 600 nm); Lag phase = length of time population remains at < 10% of maximum OD; T½Max = time taken to achieve half maximal population growth (maximum OD – minimum OD × 0.5); Max DT = maximum observed doubling time.
Figure 2Growth (A) and bioethanol fermentation (B; mean values [±S.D]) of turbo yeast (●) and MYA-796 (○) grown using GJ+fosEp. Note that ethanol concentrations were sampled after yeast cultures had reached stationary phase (typically t48h); ethanol concentrations decreased after t125h.
Figure 3Cell morphology of yeast strains. A = yeast-like growth of turbo (S. cerevisiae) showing solitary blastoconidia and normal budding; B = pseudohyphal growth of MYA-796 (S. boulardii). Scale bars represent 15 μm.
Mean [±S.D] cellular sterol composition (%) of turbo yeast and MYA-796
| | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |
| |||||||||
| 17.92 [0.38] | 17.79 [0.49] | 5.93 [1.65] | 8.06 [0.59] | 14.45 [2.02] | 12.25 [1.49] | — | — | |||
| 15.53 [2.80] | 12.31 [0.10] | 5.90 [0.09] | 9.31 [0.76] | 11.26 [3.20] | 16.52 [0.23] | — | — | |||
|
| 5.7 [0.78] | 1.6 [0.41] | 26.9 [1.27] | 12.2 [2.12] | 27.10 [1.79] | 27.30 [2.05] | 4.6 [0.48] | 20.7 [0.96] | ||
The most abundant sterol in each experiment is emboldened. a = sum of all minor sterol intermediates (each comprising < 5% of total cellular sterol fraction); b = exogenously supplied cholesterol; Strikethrough = not detected.
Figure 4Sterol composition. Overlay of GC-MS sterol chromatograms for turbo yeast (unbroken trace) and MYA-796 (broken trace) grown on GJ + tfosEp. Diagnostic fragmentation spectra for 1) zymosterol, 2) ergosterol and 3) lanosterol are shown; note the presence of minor sterol intermediates (retention times 31.5-34.5 min and 36.5 min).
Figure 5Cholesterol assimilation experiments. Overlay of GC-MS sterol chromatograms for A) turbo yeast (unbroken trace) and B) MYA-796 (broken trace) grown on glcYM+chol. The diagnostic fragmentation spectrum for cholesterol is shown (C). Note the increased abundance of minor sterol intermediates (bracketed arrow) relative to cultures grown on GJ + tfosEp and YPD media.