| Literature DB >> 26267110 |
Ana Karin Navarro-Mtz1, Fermín Pérez-Guevara.
Abstract
Mathematical models have been used from growth kinetic simulation to gen regulatory networks prediction for B. thuringiensis culture. However, this culture is a time dependent dynamic process where cells physiology suffers several changes depending on the changes in the cell environment. Therefore, through its culture, B. thuringiensis presents three phases related with the predominance of three major metabolic pathways: vegetative growth (Embded-Meyerhof-Parnas pathway), transition (γ-aminobutiric cycle) and sporulation (tricarboxylic acid cycle). There is not available a mathematical model that relates the different stages of cultivation with the metabolic pathway active on each one of them. Therefore, in the present study, and based on published data, a biodynamic model was generated to describe the dynamic of the three different phases based on their major metabolic pathways. The biodynamic model is used to study the interrelation between the different culture phases and their relationship with the Cry protein production. The model consists of three interconnected modules where each module represents one culture phase and its principal metabolic pathway. For model validation four new fermentations were done showing that the model constructed describes reasonably well the dynamic of the three phases. The main results of this model imply that poly-β-hydroxybutyrate is crucial for endospore and Cry protein production. According to the yields of dipicolinic acid and Cry from poly-β-hydroxybutyrate, calculated with the model, the endospore and Cry protein production are not just simultaneous and parallel processes they are also competitive processes.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 26267110 PMCID: PMC4884025 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-014-0079-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Figure 1Schematic representation of (a) culture with their key compounds and (b) model modules.
Nomenclature
| Parameter | Description | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Cry | Cry protein concentration | g/L |
| Crymax | Maximum Cry protein concentration obtained | g/L |
| DPA | Dipicolinic acid concentration | g/L |
| DPAmax | Maximum dipicolinic acid concentration obtained | g/L |
| PHB | Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate concentration | g/L |
| PHBmax | Maximum Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate concentration obtained | g/L |
| t | Time since inoculation | h |
| tc | Critical time | h |
| X | Biomass concentration | g/L |
| Xmax | Maximum biomass concentration obtained | g/L |
| YCry/PHB | Yield of Cry from PHB | g Cry/g PHB |
| YDPA/PHB | Yield of DPA from PHB | g DPA/g PHB |
| YDPA/X | Yield of DPA from biomass | g DPA/g X |
| YX/S | Yield of biomass from glucose | g biomass/g glucose |
| μmax | Maximum specific growth rate | 1/h |
| μmaxc | Maximum specific Cry production rate | 1/h |
| μmaxd | Maximum specific DPA production rate | 1/h |
| μmaxp | Maximum specific PHB production rate | 1/h |
|
| ||
| c | Cry protein | |
| d | Dipicolinic acid | |
| i | Key compound (i = x, p, d or c) | |
| p | Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate | |
| x | Biomass | |
Parameters estimated with structural model
| Parameter | F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glucose-Soybean meal (g/L) | 25.1-4.4 | 34.74-14.73 | 44.42-25.05 | 54.1-35.37 |
| Xmax (g/L) | 5.58 | 8.58 | 10.09 | 13.07 |
| PHBmax (g/L) | 0.61 | 0.71 | 1.16 | 1.41 |
| DPAmax (g/L) | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.16 |
| Crymax (g/L) | 0.19 | 0.31 | 0.53 | 0.78 |
| μmax (1/h) | 0.78 | 1.06 | 0.90 | 0.86 |
| μmaxp (1/h) | 1.07 | 0.89 | 0.95 | 1.02 |
| μmaxd (1/h) | 0.66 | 0.72 | 0.59 | 0.65 |
| μmaxc (1/h) | 0.20 | 0.42 | 0.40 | 0.33 |
| tc | 4.54 | 4.12 | 4.95 | 6.58 |
| tcp | 8.46 | 7.90 | 8.39 | 8.88 |
| tcd | 14.12 | 12.94 | 15.77 | 14.32 |
| tcc | 14.88 | 12.77 | 14.96 | 16.46 |
| YDPA/X (g DPA/g biomass) | 0.025 | 0.030 | 0.018 | 0.0093 |
| YDPA/PHB (g DPA/g PHB) | 1.02 | 0.43 | 0.21 | 0.15 |
| YCry/PHB (g Cry/g PHB) | 0.19 | 2.53 | 4.92 | 5.83 |
Figure 2Experimental and simulated kinetics of key compounds of var. HD-73. Key compound kinetics: (a) biomass; (b) Poly-β-hidroxybutyrate; (c) Endospores and dipicolinic acid (DPA); and (d) Cry protein. Experimental kinetics of the key compounds (dots) obtained at different glucose and soybean meal concentration. Simulated kinetics of key compounds calculated with the biodynamic model (dotted lines).
Parameters culture of reported in the literature
| Biomass | PHB | Cry | μmaxa | YX/Sb | YCry/Xc | Comment | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.41 to 32.19 g/L | 0.16-1.24 g/L | 0.19 - 1.09 | 0.43 - 0.67 | 0.02 to 0.03 | Same culture conditions and techniques to this work. | Previous experimentsg | |
| 6.78 to 25.70 g/Lf | 0.52-1.1 mg/L | 0.1-1.2 g/L | 0.37 - 0.63f | 0.39 - 0.68f | 0.01 to 0.04 | Same culture conditions and techniques to this work. | Navarro et al. ([ |
| 2.57 to 13.64 g/L | 8.99 to 13.17%e | 0.17-0.77 g/L | 0.78 - 1.06 | 0.16 - 0.25 | 0.06 to 0.05 | Culture medium with different initial nutrient concentration. Biomass detection by direct counts technique. PHB detection by CG Technique. Cry detection by SDS-PAGE technique. | Present work |
| 1.65x109 CFU/cm3 | 2.67 g/L | 0.7 | Starch processing wastewater medium. Biomass detection by CFU technique. Cry detection by SDS-PAGE technique. | Chang et al. ([ | |||
| 16 g/L | 12.8 - 15.7 g/L | 0.69-1.2 | 0.8 to 0.98 | Fed Batch with balanced flux of substrate. Biomass detection by UV-Vis technique. Cry detection by ELISA technique. | Anderson and Jayaraman ([ | ||
| 3.8x108 CFU/cm3i | 1.043 g/Li | 1.19 | Culture with SodAcet as pH control agent. Biomass detection by CFU technique. Cry detection by alkaline solubilization and Bradford method. | Dang Vu et al. ([ | |||
| 0.34 to 1.02 g/L | 7.54 to 29.41%e | Nutrient broth as culture medium. PHB detection by UV-Vis technique. | Aslim et al. ([ | ||||
| 2.78-3.3 g/L | 0.28 - 0.415 g/L | Different oxygen supply. Biomass detection by dry weight technique. Cry detection by alkaline solubilization and Lowry method. | Avignone-Rossa et al. (1992) | ||||
| 5.6-20 g/Lh | 0.58-0.8 | 0.3-0.7 | Culture medium with different initial nutrient concentration. Culture under similar conditions to this work. | Amicarelli et al. (2010) | |||
| 1.64-4.78 g/L | Culture media with different peptone + yeast extract concentration. Biomass detection by dry weight technique. | Prabakaran and Hoti (2008) | |||||
| 0.81 | 2.25g | Culture under conditions of carbon limitation. | Popovic et al. ([ | ||||
| 0.58-0.8 | 0.37-0.7 | Culture in intermittent fed-batch with total cell retention. Culture medium with different glucose and yeast extract concentration. | Atehortúa et al. (2007) | ||||
| 8.5 - 15.9 g/L | 0.79-1.1 | 0.41-0.8 | Similar conditions of culture to this work. Biomass detection by UV-Vis. | Berbert-Molina et al. ([ | |||
| 0.36-2.66 g/L | Similar conditions of culture to this work. | Farrera et al. ([ | |||||
| 0.95 | Similar conditions of culture to this work. | Holmberg and Sievänen ([ | |||||
| 0.53 | Similar conditions of culture to this work. | Rivera et al. ([ |
aMaximum specific growth rate (1/h).
bYield of biomass from glucose (g biomass/g glucose).
cYield of Cry from biomass (g Cry/g biomass). This value was calculated with the biomass and Cry protein concentration reported.
dThis value was calculated considering that the weight of one B. thuringiensis cell is 2.3 pg (Rodriguez and de la Torre, 1996).
ePHB percentage of dry cell weight.
fUnpublished data.
gYield of active biomass from limiting substrate.
hThis value was calculated with the glucose concentration in the media and the yield of biomass from glucose reported by the author.
Figure 3Comparison of simulated and experimental key compound concentrations of var. HD-73. Batch fermentations at different glucose and soybean meal concentration: F1 at 25.1 & 4.4 g/L; F2 at 34.74 & 14.73 g/L; F3 at 44.42 & 25.05 g/L; and F4 at 54.1 & 35.37 g/L, respectively. Comparison between simulated and experimental data of (a) biomass; (b) Poly-B-hydroxybutyrate; (c) dipicolinic acid (DPA); and (d) Cry protein.