| Literature DB >> 32347408 |
Samer Younes1, Felix Bracharz1, Dania Awad1, Farah Qoura1, Norbert Mehlmer1, Thomas Brueck2.
Abstract
Due to increasinpan>g oil prices and climate change concerns, biofuels have become increasingly important as potential alternative energy sources. However, the use of arable lands and valuable resources for the production of biofuel feedstock compromises food security and negatively affect the environment. Single cell oils (SCOs), accumulated by oleaginous yeasts, show great promise for efficient production of biofuels. However, the high production costs attributed to feedstocks or raw materials present a major limiting factor. The fermentative conversion of abundant, low-value biomass into microbial oil would alleviate this limitation. Here, we explore the feasibility of utilizing microalgae-based cell residues as feedstock for yeast oil production. We developed an efficient, single-step enzymatic hydrolysis to generate Scenedesmus obtusiusculus hydrolysate (SH) without thermo-chemical pretreatment. With this eco-friendly process, glucose conversion efficiencies reached 90-100%. Cutaneotrichosporon oleaginosus, Cryptococcus curvatus and Rhodosporidium toruloides were cultivated on SH as sole nutrients source. Only C. oleaginosus was able to accumulate intracellular lipids, with a 35% (g lipid/g DCW) content and a yield of 3.6 g/L. Our results demonstrate the potential valorization of algal biomass into desired end-products such as biofuels.Entities:
Keywords: Cutaneotrichosporon oleaginosus; Enzymatic hydrolysis; Lipid production; Microalgae biomass; Scenedesmus obtusiusculu
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32347408 PMCID: PMC7378118 DOI: 10.1007/s00449-020-02354-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioprocess Biosyst Eng ISSN: 1615-7591 Impact factor: 3.210
Biochemical composition of S. obtusiusculus, calculated as percent of total dry weight
| Biomass component | Content % |
|---|---|
| % (g/g dry biomass weight) | |
| Water | 3.7 |
| Carbohydrates | 33.8 |
| Proteins | 48.7 |
| Lipids | 8.3 |
| Pigments, secondary metabolites | 3.6 |
| Ash | 1.9 |
Relative standard deviation for all given numbers is ≤ ± 2%
Fig. 1Glucose concentration of SH displayed as a factor of various enzymes mixes and concentrations (a). Glucose concentration of SH displayed as a factor of the combination of enzyme mixtures with Cellic CTec 2 (b)
A comparison of monosaccharide content % (g/g dry biomass weight) resulting from acidic and enzymatic hydrolysis
| Sugar | Acidic hydrolysis | Enzymatic hydrolysis | Conversion |
|---|---|---|---|
| % (g/g dry biomass weight) | % (g/g dry biomass weight) | Efficiency (%) | |
| Glucose | 22 | 20–22 | 90–100 |
| Mannose | – | – | |
| Galactose | 10 | 2–2.5 | 20–25 |
| Rhamnose | ~ 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Fucose | ~ 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Ribose | ~ 1 | 0 | 0 |
Relative standard deviation for all given numbers is ≤ ± 2%
Fig. 2Rapid estimation of lipid contents in C. oleaginosus, C. curvatus and R. toruloides following 4 days cultivation on SH, determined by Nile red assay
Fig. 3C. oleaginous growth trend when grown on MNM and SH over 4 days in a shake flask fermentation
Fig. 4Lipid content (%, g lipid/g DCW) and lipid yield (g/L) of C. oleaginous cultivated in MNM and SH media for 4 days in shake flask fermentation