| Literature DB >> 27042211 |
Martijn Diender1, Alfons J M Stams2, Diana Z Sousa1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Synthesis gas, a mixture of CO, H2, and CO2, is a promising renewable feedstock for bio-based production of organic chemicals. Production of medium-chain fatty acids can be performed via chain elongation, utilizing acetate and ethanol as main substrates. Acetate and ethanol are main products of syngas fermentation by acetogens. Therefore, syngas can be indirectly used as a substrate for the chain elongation process.Entities:
Keywords: Butanol; Butyrate; Caproate; Clostridium autoethanogenum; Clostridium kluyveri; Hexanol; Hydrogen
Year: 2016 PMID: 27042211 PMCID: PMC4818930 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-016-0495-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Summary of reactions performed by C. autoethanogenum and C. kluyveri
| Product | Reaction | |
|---|---|---|
|
| Acetate | 4 CO + 2 H2O ⟶ CH3COO− + H+ + 2 CO2 |
| Ethanol | 6 CO + 3 H2O ⟶ C2H5OH + 4 CO2 | |
| Alcohols indirecta | 2 CO + H2O + Xn–COOH + H+ ⟶ Xn–CH2OH + 2 CO2 | |
|
| Butyrateb | 6 C2H5OH + 4 CH3COO− ⟶ 5 C3H7COO− + H+ + 3 H2O + 2 H2 |
| Caproateb | 6 C2H5OH + 5 C3H7COO− ⟶ 5 C5H11COO− + CH3COO− + H+ + 3 H2O + 2 H2 |
a X n displays a saturated carbon chain of length n
b Reaction stoichiometry of butyrate and caproate formation might differ based on the concentrations of substrates available
Fig. 1Co-culture establishment. a Production profile of C. autoethanogenum grown with CO and H2, the headspace was refilled with H2/CO at t = 4. b Production profile of C. kluyveri, at t = 4, 50 kPa CO was introduced to the culture. c A pure culture of C. autoethanogenum mixed in a 1:1 ratio with a pure culture of C. kluyveri at t = 4. d A pure culture of C. kluyveri mixed in a 1:1 ratio with a pure culture of C. autoethanogenum at t = 4. The legend is representative for all displayed graphs. Solid and open circle symbols represent left and right y-axis, respectively
Fig. 2Standard production profile of the co-culture in non-shaking conditions. On all data series, a standard deviation is displayed over duplicate experiments. Solid and open circle symbols represent left and right y-axis, respectively
Fig. 3Effect of initial acetate concentration on the production of MCFAs. Data displayed are representative for 13 days after incubation using 130 kPa CO as a substrate. At the end of cultivation, CO was depleted in all cultures. On all graphs, a standard deviation is displayed over duplicate experiments
Fig. 4The effect of H2:CO ratio on the production profile of the co-culture. a Pure CO headspace. b 1:2 ratio of H2/CO c 2:1 ratio of H2:CO. d H2/CO2 headspace. e Product concentrations at the end of incubation. f Mole of acetate consumed per mole of gas (H2 + CO) consumed. On all graphs a standard deviation is displayed over duplicate experiments. Solid and open circle symbols represent left and right y-axis, respectively
Fig. 5Effect of shaking and CO pressure on the co-culture. a Production profile under shaking conditions. b Production profile with maintained CO pressure (>50 kPa), under shaking conditions. c Production profile after initial non-shaking incubation and subsequent transfer to shaking conditions (after t = 4). On all data series, a standard deviation is displayed over duplicate experiments. Solid and open circle symbols represent left and right y-axis, respectively
Fig. 6Co-cultivation under excess CO conditions. Shaking was applied after 4 days (red vertical line). a Acid concentration profile. b Alcohol concentration profile. c Partial gas pressures of CO, CO2, and H2. d Estimated total concentration of products formed, approximated by a Gompertz equation. e Total estimated volumetric production rates displayed as the derivative of the Gompertz equation. f Estimated net volumetric production rates after compensation of product formation and consumption according to Eqs. 3 and 4. Solid and open circle symbols represent left and right y-axis, respectively
Gompertz model (Eqs. 1, 2) parameter estimates, and their standard errors, for each of the products
| Butyrate | Caproate | Butanol | Hexanol | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (mM)a | 25.8 (±0.24) | 10.0 (±0.25) | 5.73 (±0.12) | 4.01 (±0.16) |
|
| 10.4 (±0.80) | 2.86 (±0.31) | 3.47 (±0.69) | 1.98 (±0.46) |
|
| 2.99 (±0.11) | 3.69 (±0.19) | 4.28 (±0.18) | 4.95 (±0.26) |
a Maximal product concentration
b Maximal volumetric production rate
c Lag time before production occurs
Fig. 7Schematic representation of the co-culture of C. autoethanogenum and C. kluyveri. Reaction stoichiometry and ATP yield for each of the cells are not displayed. Conversion of butyrate to butyraldehyde and caproate to caproaldehyde is assumed to proceed via an aldehyde oxidoreductase, as is observed for acetate to acetaldehyde formation. CODH carbon monoxide dehydrogenase, RnF ferredoxin-NAD:oxidoreductase
Maximal (M) and average (A) production rates (mmol/l/day) of the co-culture compared with other pure- and mixed cultures
| Acetate | Butyrate | Caproate | Ethanol | Butanol | Hexanol | Substrate | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Co-culture (M)a | NA | 8.5 | 2.5 | NA | 3.5 | 2.0 | Acetate + CO | This study |
| Co-culture (A)a, b | NA | 4.2 | 0.7 | NA | 1.4 | 0.9 | Acetate + CO | This study |
|
| 0.8 | 0.25 | 0.2 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 | CO + H2 | [ |
|
| 47 | 6.3 | 4.6 | 8.1 | 2.7 | 2.1 | CO + H2 | [ |
|
| 2.3 | 0.89 | 0.48 | 1.57 | 0.53 | 0.25 | CO + H2 | [ |
|
| NA | NA | ND | 16.7 | 4.5 | ND | CO | [ |
| Mixed culture on H2/CO2a, f | 3.25 | 0.65 | 0.26 | ND | ND | ND | H2 + CO2 | [ |
a Zero or negative rates are indicated NA, not determined rates are indicated ND
b Average production rates in this study were calculated over the production stage with net rates above 0.05 mmol/l/day, in this way the lag phase and inhibited phase, in which there is no significant production, are neglected
c Rates were recalculated from given concentrations assuming a production phase of 360 h. The data displayed represent the culture labeled as −Cu/+10 × Mo
d Rates reported were originally in mmol/g protein/h and were here recalculated to the maximal and average volumetric production rates using the maximal and average value for the protein concentration and specific production rate reported, respectively. Data shown are taken from the culture growing at 25 °C in exponential phase
e Rates were recalculated from given specific production rates in (g/g biomass/h). A value 0.2 g/l biomass was used for performing the recalculation
f Rates were recalculated from given volumetric production rates in (mmol-C/l/day). Data displayed here represent the maximal reported production rates in different phases of the cultivation