| Literature DB >> 30687758 |
Jiafu Huang1,2, Danfeng Zhang1,2, Yixin Ou1,3, Guoguang Zhang1,2, Linhua Zheng2, Lizhuan Lin2, Xiaomei Ye2, Xiaofeng Zhu2, Yutian Pan1,2.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to optimize the cultural conditions for Bacillus megaterium using Agaricus bisporus industrial wastewater as nature culture through response surface methodology. In our present study, we analyzed the total number of living B. megaterium in the fermentation broth using multispectral imaging flow cytometry. Plackett-Burman design was applied to evaluate the effects of six variables, namely, initial pH, industrial wastewater solubility, rotating speed, culture temperature, inoculum size, and loading volume. Loading volume, initial pH, and culture temperature were found to influence the biomass of B. megaterium significantly and were further optimized by Box-Behnken design. After verification test, the optimum fermentation conditions of B. megaterium using the A. bisporus processing wastewater as nature culture media were obtained as follows: initial pH of 7.4, culture temperature of 25°C, loading volume of 40 mL/250 mL, culture time of 24 h, industrial wastewater solubility of 1%, rotating speed of 200 rpm, and inoculum size of 8%. The predicted optimum model's value was 8.88 × 108 Obj/mL and the average experimental value was 9.03 ± 0.02 × 108 Obj/mL, which met the national microbial fertilizers' standard. Furthermore, the field experiment results showed that the fermentation broth of B. megaterium could significantly improve the yield of Spinacia oleracea L.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30687758 PMCID: PMC6327248 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8106245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The factors and levels of Plackett-Burman experiment.
| Symbol | Factors | Levels | |
|---|---|---|---|
| -1 | 1 | ||
| A | Solubility (%) | 1.00 | 1.25 |
| B | pH | 6.5 | 8.0 |
| C | Inoculation does (%) | 8 | 10 |
| D | Temperature (°C) | 28 | 36 |
| E | Speed (rmp) | 200 | 250 |
| F | Loaded liquid (mL/250mL) | 30 | 60 |
Experimental design of steepest ascent and corresponding results.
| Run | Loaded liquid (mL/250mL) | pH | Culture temperature (°C) | Total number of living |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 150 | 5.5 | 40 | 0.17 ± 0.01 |
| 2 | 120 | 6.0 | 36 | 0.19 ± 0.01 |
| 3 | 90 | 6.5 | 32 | 2.96 ± 0.02 |
| 4 | 60 | 7.0 | 28 | 4.79 ± 0.02 |
| 5 | 30 | 7.5 | 24 | 14.91 ± 0.03 |
| 6 | 15 | 8.0 | 20 | 0.11 ± 0.01 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of 3-batch independent experiments.
Experimental design and results of Box-Behnken design.
| Run |
|
|
| Total number of living | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Code level | Real level | Code level | Real level | Code level | Real level | ||
| 1 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 7.5 | 0 | 28 | 7.91 ± 0.02 |
| 2 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 7.5 | 0 | 28 | 8.67 ± 0.03 |
| 3 | 0 | 30 | -1 | 6.5 | -1 | 24 | 1.02 ± 0.02 |
| 4 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 7.5 | 0 | 28 | 8.50 ± 0.02 |
| 5 | 1 | 60 | 0 | 7.5 | 1 | 32 | 3.41 ± 0.02 |
| 6 | 1 | 60 | 1 | 8.0 | 0 | 28 | 1.12 ± 0.01 |
| 7 | -1 | 15 | -1 | 6.5 | 0 | 28 | 4.03 ± 0.02 |
| 8 | -1 | 15 | 0 | 7.5 | 1 | 32 | 5.41 ± 0.03 |
| 9 | -1 | 15 | 1 | 8.0 | 0 | 28 | 6.04 ± 0.03 |
| 10 | 1 | 60 | 0 | 7.5 | -1 | 24 | 0.25 ± 0.02 |
| 11 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 7.5 | 0 | 28 | 8.57 ± 0.03 |
| 12 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 7.5 | 0 | 28 | 8.75 ± 0.04 |
| 13 | 0 | 30 | 1 | 8.0 | 1 | 32 | 4.62 ± 0.02 |
| 14 | 0 | 30 | 1 | 8.0 | -1 | 24 | 1.63 ± 0.01 |
| 15 | 1 | 60 | -1 | 6.5 | 0 | 28 | 2.04 ± 0.02 |
| 16 | -1 | 15 | 0 | 7.5 | -1 | 24 | 2.62 ± 0.01 |
| 17 | 0 | 30 | -1 | 6.5 | 1 | 32 | 4.40 ± 0.02 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of 3-batch independent experiments.
Figure 1Live and dead B. megaterium based on multispectral imaging flow. Note. (a) From the collected images, live and dead B. megaterium were visually identified (as indicated by colored crosses) and the tagged populations were gated on the original plot. (b) Images of dead B. megaterium in the fermented liquid. (c) Images of live B. megaterium in the fermented liquid. Images from within each region were chosen at random. From left to right, bright field, SYTO 9, and PI channel images are displayed.
Experimental design and results of Plackett-Burman.
| Run | A | B | C | D | E | F | Total number of living |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 3.66 ± 0.02 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 8.12 ± 0.04 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.49 ± 0.03 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 8.37 ± 0.04 |
| 5 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 7.52 ± 0.02 |
| 6 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 7.16 ± 0.03 |
| 7 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 6.28 ± 0.02 |
| 8 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 7.38 ± 0.01 |
| 9 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 8.63 ± 0.04 |
| 10 | 1 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 3.08 ± 0.01 |
| 11 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 6.08 ± 0.02 |
| 12 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 5.78 ± 0.03 |
Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of 3-batch independent experiments.
Analysis of variance in Plackett-Burman.
| Source | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Squares | F Value |
| Coefficient Estimate | Importance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prob>F | |||||||
| Model | 33.00 | 6 | 5.50 | 7.17 | 0.0236 | ||
| A | 0.52 | 1 | 0.52 | 0.67 | 0.4491 | 0.21 | 5 |
| B | 8.89 | 1 | 8.89 | 11.60 | 0.0191 | 0.86 | 2 |
| C | 0.27 | 1 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.5808 | 0.15 | 6 |
| D | 6.35 | 1 | 6.35 | 8.28 | 0.0347 | -0.73 | 3 |
| E | 3.34 | 1 | 3.34 | 4.35 | 0.0913 | -0.53 | 4 |
| F | 13.63 | 1 | 13.63 | 17.78 | 0.0084 | -1.07 | 1 |
| Residual | 3.83 | 5 | 0.77 | ||||
| Cor Total | 36.83 | 11 |
Analysis regression and variance results in Box-Behnken design.
| Source | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Squares | F Value |
| Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prob>F | ||||||
| Model | 142.05 | 9 | 15.78 | 86.36 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 15.90 | 1 | 15.90 | 87.02 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 0.46 | 1 | 0.46 | 2.52 | 0.1563 |
|
|
| 18.97 | 1 | 18.97 | 103.81 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 2.15 | 1 | 2.15 | 11.74 | 0.0110 |
|
|
| 0.034 | 1 | 0.034 | 0.19 | 0.6782 | |
|
| 0.038 | 1 | 0.038 | 0.21 | 0.6621 | |
|
| 28.11 | 1 | 28.11 | 153.80 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 28.22 | 1 | 28.22 | 154.39 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 37.23 | 1 | 37.23 | 203.73 | <0.0001 |
|
| Residual | 1.28 | 7 | 0.18 | |||
| Lack of Fit | 0.84 | 3 | 0.28 | 2.52 | 0.1964 | |
| Pure Error | 0.44 | 4 | 0.11 | |||
| Cor Total | 143.33 | 16 | ||||
| R2=0.9911, R2Adj=0.9796, adequate precision = 26.229, CV = 9.20% | ||||||
Notes: ∗ means significant; ∗∗ means very significant.
Figure 2The effect of cross-interaction among load liquid, pH, and culture temperature on total number of alive B. megaterium. Note. (a) Response surface plot of effects of interaction between load liquid and pH on total number of alive B. megaterium. (b) Contour line of effects of interaction between load liquid and pH on total number of alive B. megaterium. (c) Response surface plot of effects of interaction between load liquid and culture temperature on total number of alive B. megaterium. (d) Contour line of effects of interaction between load and culture temperature on total number of alive B. megaterium. (e) Response surface plot of effects of interaction between pH and culture temperature on total number of alive B. megaterium. (f) Contour line of effects of interaction between pH and culture temperature on total number of alive B. megaterium.
The effect of fermentation broth and A. bisporus industrial wastewater on the yield, plant height, and leaf area of spinach.
| Group | Item | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield(g/plate) | Plant height(cm) | Leaf area(cm2/plant) | |
| A | 228.8 ± 1.9 | 21.3 ± 1.2 | 50.1 ± 0.9 |
| B | 233.4 ± 2.5 | 24.4 ± 0.7 | 55.1 ± 1.3 |
| C | 250.1 ± 1.5 | 26.9 ± 0.9 | 59.3 ± 1.3 |
| D | 279.8 ± 4.8 | 27.9 ± 0.8 | 62.5 ± 0.8 |
| E | 229.7 ± 2.7 | 23.2 ± 1.8 | 53.6 ± 2.1 |
| F | 242.2 ± 2.9 | 25.4 ± 1.4 | 56.9 ± 2.3 |
| G | 259.6 ± 3.1 | 26.3 ± 1.2 | 60.1 ± 2.5 |
Notes: ∗ means significant; ∗∗ means very significant. A: control group treated with water; B: spinach treated with fermentation broth one time; C: spinach treated with fermentation broth two times; D: spinach treated with fermentation broth three times; E: spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater one time; F: spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater two times; G: spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater three times.
Figure 3The grown status of spinach. Note. (a) Control group treated with water. (b) Spinach treated with fermentation broth one time. (c) Spinach treated with fermentation broth two times. (d) Spinach treated with fermentation broth three times. (e) Spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater one time. (f) Spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater two times. (g) Spinach treated with A. bisporus industrial wastewater three times.