| Literature DB >> 28352519 |
Thangapandi Marudhupandi1, Ramamoorthy Sathishkumar2, Thipramalai Thankappan Ajith Kumar3.
Abstract
Response surface methodology (RSM) was used to enhance the biomass and lipid content in Nannochloropsis salina due to its economic importance. Preliminary screening results revealed that the heterotrophically cultivated N. salina with various carbon and nitrogen sources yielded higher biomass (0.91 ± 0.0035 g/L) and lipid content (37.1 ± 0.49 mg/L) than that of the photoautotrophical cultivation (0.21 ± 0.009 g/L and 22.16 ± 0.27 mg/L). Significant sources that greatly influenced on biomass and lipid content of the alga were optimized through RSM. The medium consisting of glucose (7.959 g/L), sodium acetate (1.46 g/L), peptone (7.6 g/L) and sodium thiosulphate (1.05 g/L) was found to be the optimal concentration for heterotrophic cultivation by response optimizer. Confirmation experiment results for the RSM optimized concentration yielded the biomass of 1.85 g/L and total lipid content of 48.6 mg/L. In this study, we provide with a strategy for enhancing the biomass and lipid content in N. salina.Entities:
Keywords: Biomass; Fatty acid; Heterotrophic cultivation; Nannochloropsis salina; Response surface methodology
Year: 2016 PMID: 28352519 PMCID: PMC5040862 DOI: 10.1016/j.btre.2016.02.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Rep (Amst) ISSN: 2215-017X
Effect of different types and concentrations of carbon and nitrogen sources on biomass and lipid production of N. salina in heterotrophic conditions.
| Sources | Concentration (g/L) | Biomass (g/L) | Lipid (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carbon | |||
| Glucose | 1 | 0.39 ± 0.023 | 26.6 ± 0.37 |
| 2 | 0.57 ± 0.056 | 31.4 ± 0.21 | |
| 4 | 0.86 ± 0.062 | 37.1 ± 0.49 | |
| Sodium acetate | 0.25 | 0.31 ± 0.036 | 23.5 ± 0.32 |
| 0.5 | 0.36 ± 0.025 | 26.4 ± 0.24 | |
| 1 | 0.33 ± 0.032 | 25.5 ± 0.24 | |
| Nitrogen | |||
| Peptone | 1 | 0.57 ± 0.0027 | 26.3 ± 0.15 |
| 2 | 0.73 ± 0.0029 | 23.2 ± 0.29 | |
| 4 | 0.91 ± 0.0035 | 22.5 ± 0.35 | |
| Yeast extract | 1 | 0.24 ± 0.0071 | 21.4 ± 0.15 |
| 2 | 0.28 ± 0.0052 | 19.5 ± 0.23 | |
| 4 | 0.31 ± 0.0083 | 17.4 ± 0.57 | |
| Meat extract | 1 | 0.41 ± 0.0032 | 15.3 ± 0.1 |
| 2 | 0.35 ± 0.0051 | 14.2 ± 0.26 | |
| 4 | 0.22 ± 0.0047 | 11.5 ± 0.39 | |
| Malt extract | 0.5 | 0.23 ± 0.0003 | 22.3 ± 0.36 |
| 1 | 025 ± 0.0065 | 19.4 ± 0.81 | |
| 2 | 0.42 ± 0.0061 | 16.6 ± 0.53 | |
| Urea | 0.5 | 0.24 ± 0.0053 | 21.4 ± 0.31 |
| 1 | 0.18 ± 0.0036 | 23.4 ± 0.22 | |
| 2 | 0.16 ± 0.0021 | 24.6 ± 0.25 | |
| Sodium nitrate | 0.5 | 0.29 ± 0.0036 | 21.4 ± 0.27 |
| 1 | 0.38 ± 0.0042 | 19.7 ± 0.36 | |
| 2 | 0.43 ± 0.0028 | 15.2 ± 0.69 | |
| Ammonium nitrate | 0.5 | 0.29 ± 0.0029 | 22.8 ± 0.73 |
| 1 | 0.25 ± 0.0025 | 21.4 ± 0.26 | |
| 2 | 0.18 ± 0.0038 | 20.2 ± 0.14 | |
Response surface method design in actual level of variables and the predicted and observed responses functions for optimizing the media composition of N. salina under heterotrophic cultivation.
| Run order | Glucose (g/L) | Sodium acetate (g/L) | Peptone (g/L) | Sodium thiosulphate (g/L) | Biomass | Lipid | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observed (g/L) | Predicted (g/L) | Observed | Predicted | |||||
| 1 | 6.25 | 1.25 | 6.5 | 0.5375 | 1.4763 | 1.53843 | 35.7370 | 35.9195 |
| 2 | 8.75 | 1.25 | 6.5 | 0.5375 | 1.7847 | 1.77049 | 46.0236 | 46.9064 |
| 3 | 6.25 | 1.75 | 6.5 | 0.5375 | 1.1792 | 1.16578 | 30.3100 | 31.4074 |
| 4 | 8.75 | 1.75 | 6.5 | 0.5375 | 1.3428 | 1.42419 | 33.9520 | 35.2420 |
| 5 | 6.25 | 1.25 | 9.5 | 0.5375 | 1.5534 | 1.57109 | 33.5662 | 34.3670 |
| 6 | 8.75 | 1.25 | 9.5 | 0.5375 | 1.7641 | 1.79691 | 42.7780 | 43.7658 |
| 7 | 6.25 | 1.75 | 9.5 | 0.5375 | 1.2548 | 1.33559 | 33.2910 | 34.0211 |
| 8 | 8.75 | 1.75 | 9.5 | 0.5375 | 1.6152 | 1.58776 | 36.3659 | 36.2677 |
| 9 | 6.25 | 1.25 | 6.5 | 1.5125 | 1.4629 | 1.51356 | 38.5140 | 39.3325 |
| 10 | 8.75 | 1.25 | 6.5 | 1.5125 | 1.7563 | 1.73493 | 46.7420 | 46.9585 |
| 11 | 6.25 | 1.75 | 6.5 | 1.5125 | 1.3452 | 1.37181 | 33.5230 | 33.4818 |
| 12 | 8.75 | 1.75 | 6.5 | 1.5125 | 1.6140 | 1.61953 | 34.0360 | 33.9555 |
| 13 | 6.25 | 1.25 | 9.5 | 1.5125 | 1.3572 | 1.33523 | 37.4173 | 37.0740 |
| 14 | 8.75 | 1.25 | 9.5 | 1.5125 | 1.5137 | 1.55034 | 43.4890 | 43.1119 |
| 15 | 6.25 | 1.75 | 9.5 | 1.5125 | 1.2932 | 1.33063 | 35.5520 | 35.3895 |
| 16 | 8.75 | 1.75 | 9.5 | 1.5125 | 1.5748 | 1.57209 | 33.5110 | 34.2751 |
| 17 | 5.00 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.1836 | 1.10497 | 29.4460 | 28.7383 |
| 18 | 10.00 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.5825 | 1.57850 | 39.5700 | 38.6108 |
| 19 | 7.50 | 1.00 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.7647 | 1.73483 | 46.3136 | 45.5628 |
| 20 | 7.50 | 2.00 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.4367 | 1.38393 | 33.1300 | 32.2139 |
| 21 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 5.0 | 1.0250 | 1.5730 | 1.52567 | 39.5320 | 38.1825 |
| 22 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 11.0 | 1.0250 | 1.5462 | 1.51090 | 37.2670 | 36.9496 |
| 23 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 0.0500 | 1.7240 | 1.65545 | 41.6330 | 39.5298 |
| 24 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 2.0000 | 1.6290 | 1.61492 | 40.5140 | 40.9503 |
| 25 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.6380 | 1.70951 | 43.6230 | 44.1799 |
| 26 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.6594 | 1.70951 | 43.6530 | 44.1799 |
| 27 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.6856 | 1.70951 | 43.5380 | 44.1799 |
| 28 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.6842 | 1.70951 | 45.6420 | 44.1799 |
| 29 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.8290 | 1.70951 | 43.6585 | 44.1799 |
| 30 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.7841 | 1.70951 | 43.1167 | 44.1799 |
| 31 | 7.50 | 1.50 | 8.0 | 1.0250 | 1.6863 | 1.70951 | 46.0279 | 44.1799 |
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for biomass and lipid production response surface quadratic model.
| Source | DF | Seq SS | Adj SS | Adj MS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biomass | ||||||
| Regression | 14 | 0.94212 | 0.942120 | 0.067294 | 14.55 | 0.000 |
| Linear | 4 | 0.52384 | 0.170770 | 0.042693 | 9.23 | 0.000 |
| Square | 4 | 0.30079 | 0.300788 | 0.075197 | 16.26 | 0.000 |
| Interaction | 6 | 0.11749 | 0.117494 | 0.019582 | 4.23 | 0.010 |
| Residual error | 16 | 0.07401 | 0.074008 | 0.004625 | – | |
| Lack-of-fit | 10 | 0.04479 | 0.044791 | 0.004479 | 0.92 | 0.569 |
| Pure error | 6 | 0.02922 | 0.029217 | 0.004870 | – | – |
| Total | 30 | 1.01613 | – | – | – | – |
| Lipid | ||||||
| Regression | 14 | 786.680 | 786.680 | 56.191 | 36.32 | 0.000 |
| Linear | 4 | 418.795 | 261.058 | 65.265 | 42.19 | 0.000 |
| Square | 4 | 283.263 | 283.263 | 70.816 | 45.78 | 0.000 |
| Interaction | 6 | 84.621 | 84.621 | 14.103 | 9.12 | 0.000 |
| Residual error | 16 | 24.751 | 24.751 | 1.547 | ||
| Lack-of-fit | 10 | 16.796 | 16.796 | 1.680 | 1.27 | 0.402 |
| Pure error | 6 | 7.955 | 7.955 | 1.326 | – | – |
| Total | 30 | 811.430 | – | – | – | – |
Fig. 1Photoautotrophic and heterotrophic growth of N. salina.
Fig. 2Response surface plots showing the mutual effect of peptone and sodium thiosulphate (A), sodium acetate and peptone (B), glucose and sodium thiosulphate (C), glucose and peptone (D), sodium acetate and sodium thiosulphate (E), and glucose and sodium acetate (F) concentration of lipid production, when other variables are held at constant level.
Fig. 3Response surface plots showing the mutual effect of glucose and sodium thiosulphate (A), peptone and sodium thiosulphate (B), sodium acetate and sodium thiosulphate (C), glucose and sodium acetate (D), sodium acetate and peptone (E) glucose and peptone (F) concentration of biomass production, when other variables are held at constant level.
Fatty acid composition of N.salina cultivated under photoautotrophic and heterotrophic condition.
| Carbon chain | Fatty acids | Hetorotrophically cultivated alga fatty acid (%) | Photoautotrophically cultivated alga fatty acid (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12:00 | Lauric acid | 2.80 ± 0.037 | 1.3 ± 0.002 |
| 14:00 | Myristic acid | 8.01 ± 0.009 | 5.9 ± 0.01 |
| 16:00 | Palmitic acid | 22.84 ± 0.265 | 40.7 ± 0.55 |
| 18:00 | Stearic acid | 2.01 ± 0.005 | 0.78 ± 0.001 |
| 20:00 | Arachidic acid | 1.48 ± 0.015 | 0.3 ± 0.001 |
| 22:00 | Behenic acid | 0.86 ± 0.002 | 0.48 ± 0.002 |
| 24:00 | Lignoceric acid | 1.41 ± 0.173 | 1.16 ± 0.005 |
| 14:1 n-7 | 1.75 ± 0.01 | 2.7 ± 0.023 | |
| 16:1 n-7 | 4.71 ± 0.005 | 8.6 ± 0.36 | |
| 18:1 n-7 | 4.65 ± 0.028 | 5.5 ± 0.15 | |
| 18:1 n-9 | Oleic acid | 3.92 ± 0.01 | 4.9 ± 0.03 |
| 20:1 n-11 | 2.86 ± 0.007 | 1.83 ± 0.02 | |
| 20:1 n-9 | 1.32 ± 0.015 | 0.26 ± 0.001 | |
| 22:1 n-9 | 0.72 ± 0.004 | 0.43 ± 0.008 | |
| 24:1 n-9 | 1.67 ± 0.027 | 1.32 ± 0.017 | |
| 18:2 n-6 | Linoleic | 3.65 ± 0.21 | 1.87 ± 0.03 |
| 18:3 n-3 | Alfa-linolenic | 0.58 ± 0.56 | 0.3 ± 0.001 |
| 18:4 n-3 | Stearidonic | 1.62 ± 0.19 | 2.37 ± 0.026 |
| 20:5 n-3 | Eicosapentaenoic | 30.54 ± 1.19 | 17.4 ± 0.62 |
| 22:6 n-3 | Docosahexaenoic | 2.6 ± 0.04 | 1.9 ± 0.007 |