| Literature DB >> 29065878 |
Gouri Katre1, Namasvi Ajmera1, Smita Zinjarde1, Ameeta RaviKumar2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oleaginous yeasts are fast emerging as a possible feedstock for biodiesel production. Yarrowia lipolytica, a model oleaginous yeast is known to utilize a variety of hydrophobic substrates for lipid accumulation including waste cooking oil (WCO). Approaches to increase lipid content in this yeast include metabolic engineering which requires manipulation of multiple genes in the lipid biosynthesis pathway. A classical and cost-effective approach, namely, random chemical mutagenesis on the yeast can lead to increased production of biodiesel as is explored here.Entities:
Keywords: Biodiesel; Cerulenin; Chemical mutagenesis; Lipid production; Waste cooking oil; Yarrowia lipolytica
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29065878 PMCID: PMC5655982 DOI: 10.1186/s12934-017-0790-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Cell Fact ISSN: 1475-2859 Impact factor: 5.328
Fig. 1A schematic representation of the strategy followed to obtain the mutants
Estimation of total lipid yield of the mutants using Nile red fluorimetry
| Treatment | Mutant | Total lipid yield (g L−1) |
|---|---|---|
| MNNG | YlB6 | 0.24 ± 0.01 |
| YIC4 | 0.19 ± 0.01 | |
| YIC5 | 0.24 ± 0.01 | |
| YIC6 | 0.27 ± 0.01 | |
| YIC7 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | |
| YIB2 | 0.19 ± 0.01 | |
| MNNG + cerulenin | YIB3 | 0.18 ± 0.01 |
| YID5 | 0.27 ± 0.02 | |
| YIE1 | 0.39 ± 0.02 | |
| YIE2 | 0.20 ± 0.01 | |
| WT | 0.20 ± 0.01 |
The mutants were grown on LAM containing 30 g L−1 glucose for 96 h. The values represent the mean ± SD of three independent determinations
Fig. 2Time course studies to determine biomass, total lipid yield and lipid content of MNNG and MNNG + cerulenin treated mutants. Mutants a YlB6, b YlC7 and c YlE1were grown on 100 g L−1 WCO as mentioned in “Methods”. All values are represented as mean ± SD, determined after three independent experiments. Biomass (g L−1)—black down pointing triangle, Total lipid yield (g L−1)—black circle, Lipid content (%)—white circle. Inset: In each graph light microscopy (left panel) and Nile red fluorescence microscopy (right panel) images of the respective Y. lipolytica mutants under 100 × oil immersion objective. Bar indicates 4 μm
Biomass, total lipid yield, yield coefficient, volumetric productivities of biomass and lipid of mutants
| Treatment | Mutant | X (g L−1) | L (g L−1) | YL/X (g g−1) | QX (g L−1 h−1) | QL(g L−1 h−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No treatment | WT | 7.1 ± 0.03a | 3.2 ± 0.03a | 0.45 ± 0.004a,d | 0.074 ± 0.0002a | 0.033 ± 0.0002a |
| YIB6 | 10.86 ± 0.01b | 5.97 ± 0.01b | 0.55 ± 0.001b | 0.113 ± 0.0001b | 0.062 ± 0.0001b | |
| MNNG | YIC4 | 5.76 ± 0.03c | 2.73 ± 0.03c | 0.47 ± 0.005c,d | 0.059 ± 0.0003c | 0.028 ± 0.0003c |
| YIC5 | 5.91 ± 0.02d | 2.74 ± 0.02c | 0.46 ± 0.004d | 0.062 ± 0.0002d | 0.028 ± 0.0002c | |
| YIC6 | 6.25 ± 0.03e | 2.23 ± 0.03d | 0.35 ± 0.005e | 0.065 ± 0.0002e | 0.023 ± 0.0003d | |
| YIC7 | 7.1 ± 0.03a | 4.28 ± 0.01e | 0.60 ± 0.004f | 0.073 ± 0.0002a | 0.044 ± 0.0002e | |
| YIB2 | 7.0 ± 0.03a | 3.7 ± 0.02f | 0.53 ± 0.006g | 0.072 ± 0.0006a | 0.038 ± 0.0001f | |
| YIB3 | 5.40 ± 0.03f | 1.92 ± 0.03g | 0.35 ± 0.006e | 0.056 ± 0.0003f | 0.019 ± 0.0003g | |
| MNNG + cerulenin | YID5 | 5.73 ± 0.01c | 2.42 ± 0.02h | 0.42 ± 0.006h | 0.059 ± 0.0001c | 0.025 ± 0.0002h |
| YIE1 | 5.84 ± 0.03d | 3.91 ± 0.01i | 0.67 ± 0.004i | 0.061 ± 0.0003d | 0.041 ± 0.0001i | |
| YIE2 | 4.4 ± 0.03g | 1.57 ± 0.02j | 0.35 ± 0.004e | 0.045 ± 0.0002g | 0.016 ± 0.0002j |
The values indicate the mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Mean values within a column with different superscript letters (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j) differ significantly and were determined statistically using Graph Pad InStat ver 3.10 software (One-way ANOVA, Tukey–Kramer multiple comparison test, p < 0.05). Separate analysis was done for each column. The wild type and mutants were grown on LAM containing 100 g L−1 WCO for 96 h. WT wild type, X biomass, L total lipid yield, Y lipid/biomass yield coefficient, Q volumetric biomass productivity, Q volumetric lipid productivity. All yields were determined gravimetrically
Comparison of fatty acid methyl ester profile of the mutants with the wild type
| Fatty acid methyl ester | (wt % of total fatty acid methyl esters) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YlB6 | YIC7 | YIE1 | WTa | |
| Caprylic acid methyl ester (C8:0) | ND | ND | ND | 25.0 |
| Lauric acid methyl ester (C12:0) | ND | ND | ND | 3.2 |
| Myristic acid methyl ester (C14:0) | ND | ND | ND | 1.7 |
| Palmitic acid methyl ester (C16:0) | 29.1 | 28.1 | 30.4 | 21.1 |
| Stearic acid methyl ester (C18:0) | 6.3 | 6.1 | 8.5 | 3.4 |
| Arachidic acid methyl ester (C20:0) | 9.8 | 2.7 | 8.7 | ND |
| Heneicosanoic acid methyl ester (C21:0) | 8.9 | 2.9 | 10.5 | 1.8 |
| Total of fatty acids: Saturated | 54.1 | 39.8 | 58.1 | 56.2 |
| Palmitoleic acid methyl ester (C16:1) | ND | 4.1 | 10.0 | 0.9 |
| cis-10-Heptadecanoic acid (C17:1) | ND | ND | ND | 8.0 |
| Oleic acid methyl ester (C18:1n9c) | 33.6 | 40.1 | 25.4 | 21.0 |
| cis-11Eicosanoic acid (C20:1) | ND | ND | ND | 2.0 |
| Total of fatty acids: Monounsaturated | 33.6 | 44.2 | 35.3 | 31.9 |
| Linoleic acid methyl ester (C18:2n6c) | 12.3 | 16.0 | 6.6 | 11.8 |
| Total of fatty acids: Polyunsaturated | 12.3 | 16.0 | 6.6 | 11.8 |
| Total of fatty acids | 100 | 100 | 100 | 99.98 |
The wild type and mutants were grown on LAM containing 100 g L−1 WCO. The values represent the mean ± SD of three independent determinations
WT Wild type; aas reported earlier [9], ND Not detected
Fuel properties of biodiesel produced by the mutants and wild type grown on WCO
| Property/Test | Results for | US biodiesel standards ASTM D6751 | European biodiesel standards EN14214 | Indian biodiesel standards IS15607 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YlB6 | YIC7 | YIE1 | WT | ||||
| Density at 25 °C (g cm−3)a | 1.07 (0.87) | 1.07 (0.86) | 1.08 (0.88) | 1.04 (0.87) | NS | 0.86-0.90 | 0.86-0.90 |
| Water content (vol%)a | ND | ND | ND | ND | 0.05 max | 0.25 max | 0.03 max |
| TAN (mg NaOH g-1)a | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.8 | 0.8 max | 0.5 max | 0.5 max |
| FFA (%)a | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.4 | NS | NS | NS |
| Cu strip corrosiona | Class 1a | Class 1a | Class 1a | Class 1a | Class 3 max | Class 1 max | Class 1 max |
| CNc | 66.7 | 59.43 | 68.6 | 50.8 | 47-65 | 51 min | 51 min |
| Kinematic viscosity (40 °C; mm2 s−1)c | 5.07 | 4.57 | 5.09 | 3.6 | 1.9-6.0 | 3.5-5.0 | 3.5-5.0 |
| SNa | 190.38 (194.65) | 197.6(193.75) | 197.4 (192.28) | 256.16 (249.4) | NS | NS | NS |
| IVa | 50.03 (47.9) | 69.4 (65.82) | 50.2 (42.58) | 37.8 (47.9) | NS | 120max | NS |
| HHV(M J kg−1)b | 40.87 | 40.49 | 40.9 | 36.77 | NS | NS | NS |
| Concentration of γ-linolenic acid (C18:3) (%)a | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | NS | 12max | NS |
| FAME having ≥ 4 double bonds (%)a | ND | ND | ND | ND | NS | 1 max | NS |
The wild type and mutants were grown on LAM containing 100 g L−1 WCO. The experimental values are the mean ± SD of three independent determinations
WT Wild type, as reported earlier [9]; ND Not Detected, NS Not Specified
aExperimentally determined values, followed by predicted ones, if any, in brackets
bCalculated using predicted values of SN and IV
cPredicted values as mentioned in Materials and methods [23]
Lipid content of the three mutants, YlB6, YlC7 and YlE1 after the 6th, 12th, 18th and 24th subculture
| Number of the subculture | YlB6 | YlC7 | YlE1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 55.1 ± 0.01 | 60.08 ± 0.02 | 67.2 ± 0.02 |
| 12 | 54.9 ± 0.02 | 60.05 ± 0.02 | 66.9 ± 0.02 |
| 18 | 54.8 ± 0.02 | 59.8 ± 0.02 | 66.8 ± 0.02 |
| 24 | 54.8 ± 0.02 | 59.6 ± 0.02 | 66.8 ± 0.02 |