| Literature DB >> 32365742 |
Alok Patel1, Ulrika Rova1, Paul Christakopoulos1, Leonidas Matsakas1.
Abstract
Thraustochytrids are considered natural producers of omega-3 fatty acids as they can synthesize up to 70% docosahexaenoic acids (DHA) of total lipids. However, commercial and sustainable production of microbial DHA is limited by elevated cost of carbon substrates for thraustochytrids cultivation. This problem can be addressed by utilizing low-cost renewable substrates. In the present study, growth, lipid accumulation and fatty acid profiles of the marine thraustochytrid Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 (ATCC-PRA-276) cultivated on volatile fatty acids (C1, formic acid; C2, acetic acid; C3, propionic acid; C4, butyric acid; C5, valeric acid and C6, caproic acid) and glucose as control were evaluated for the first time. This strain showed an inability to utilize C3, C5 and C6 as a substrate when provided at >2 g/L, while efficiently utilizing C2 and C4 up to 40 g/L. The highest cell dry weight (12.35 g/L) and total lipid concentration (6.59 g/L) were attained when this strain was cultivated on 40 g/L of butyric acid, followed by cultivation on glucose (11.87 g/L and 5.34 g/L, respectively) and acetic acid (8.70 g/L and 3.43 g/L, respectively). With 40 g/L butyric acid, the maximum docosahexaenoic acid content was 2.81 g/L, corresponding to 42.63% w/w of total lipids and a yield of 0.23 g/gcell dry weight (CDW). This marine oleaginous microorganism showed an elevated potential for polyunsaturated fatty acids production at higher acetic and butyric acid concentrations than previously reported. Moreover, fluorescence microscopy revealed that growth on butyric acid caused cell size to increase to 45 µm, one of the largest values reported for oleaginous microorganisms, as well as the presence of numerous tiny lipid droplets.Entities:
Keywords: oleaginous thraustochytrids; polyunsaturated fatty acids; volatile fatty acids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32365742 PMCID: PMC7277355 DOI: 10.3390/biom10050694
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Figure 1Batch cultivation of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 on various volatile fatty acids (VFAs) at 2 g/L (A) and 10 g/L (B). Glucose (GC) was used as control. Error bars express the standard deviation of the mean (n = 3). Different letters (a,b,c,d,e) above the bars in each group of results indicate significant difference (p < 0.05), based on one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test.
Figure 2Batch cultivation of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 on acetic acid (C2) and butyric acid (C4) at 20 g/L (A) and 40 g/L (B). Glucose (GC) was used as control. Error bars express the standard deviation of the mean Error bars express the standard deviation of the mean (n = 3). Different letters (a,b,c) above the bars in each group of results indicate significant difference (p < 0.05), based on one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test.
Figure 3Morphologic analysis of cells and lipid droplets of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 grown on 40 g/L of acetic acid, butyric acid and glucose. The cells were stained with 4,4-difluoro-1,3,5,7,8-pentamethyl-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-s-indacene (BODIPY493/503) and observed by live fluorescence microscopy. Scale bars corresponds to 50 µm.
Fatty acid composition (wt% of total fatty acids) of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 cultivated on 2 g/L of various VFAs (C1:0, formic acid; C2:0, acetic acid; C3:0, propionic acid; C4:0, butyric acid; C5:0, valeric acid and C6:0, caproic acid). Glucose (GC) was used as control.
| Fatty Acids (%) in Total Lipid | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | GC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 6.04 ± 0.32 b | 7.50 ± 0.28 c | 7.26 ± 0.12 c,d | 6.46 ± 0.57 b,c | 5.44 ± 0.16 b | 6.90 ± 0.52 b,c | 21.59 ± 0.30 a |
|
| 12.12 ± 0.58 b | 14.89 ± 0.63 c | 17.60 ± 0.81 d | 17.30 ± 0.41 d | 12.64 ± 0.42 b | 25.93 ± 1.14 a | ND |
|
| ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 18.60 ± 0.73 |
|
| 3.67 ± 0.61 b | 3.42 ± 0.42 b | 4.14 ± 0.13 b | 4.44 ± 0.65 b | 3.09 ± 0.23 b | 8.38 ± 0.34 a | ND |
|
| 35.44 ± 0.82 b | 37.72 ± 0.94 c | 32.90 ± 1.23 f | 38.46 ± 0.60 c,d | 36.44 ± 0.73 b,c | 32.63 ± 0.42 e,f | 44.31 ± 0.63 a |
|
| 8.54 ± 1.17 a | 8.17 ± 0.64 a | 8.18 ± 0.82 a | 7.97± 0.35 a | 8.68 ± 1.00 a | 7.73 ± 0.92 a | ND |
|
| 18.66 ± 0.92 b | 22.45 ± 0.58 c | 25.58 ± 1.08 d | 23.23 ±1.19 c,e | 27.79 ± 0.24 a,d | 17.736 ± 0.89 b | 9.64 ± 0.35 f |
|
| 14.88 ± 1.40 d | 5.75 ± 0.48 a,b | 4.37 ± 0.73 a,b | 2.16 ± 0.41 b,c | 5.81 ± 0.89 a | ND | ND |
|
| ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 2.65 ± 0.37 |
|
| ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 2.48 ± 0.52 |
ND = not detected; Results are presented as mean ± SD, n = 3. Different superscript small letters (a,b,c,d,e,f) of each fatty acid obtained with various carbon sources indicate significant difference (Tukey’s test, p < 0.05).
Fatty acid composition (wt% of total fatty acids) of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 cultivated on 10 g/L of various VFAs (C1:0, formic acid; C2:0, acetic acid; C3:0, propionic acid; C4:0, butyric acid; C5:0, valeric acid and C6:0, caproic acid). Glucose (GC) was used as control.
| Fatty Acids (%) in Total Lipid | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | GC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 | 6.92 ± 0.42 b | 4.79 ± 0.32 c | 9.00 ± 0.40 d | 15.08 ± 0.37 a | 7.74 ± 0.35 b,d | 5.09 ± 0.30 c | 14.99 ± 1.13 a |
| C14:1 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 17.37 ± 0.72 | ND |
| C15:0 | 18.54 ± 0.49 d | 3.49 ± 0.03 c | 19.59 ± 0.90 a | 10.25 ± 0.28 b | 22.56 ± 1.28 a | 8.39 ± 0.82 b | 21.37 ± 0.85 a |
| C 16:0 | 28.43 ± 0.85 b | 23.22 ± 0.32 c | 29.58 ± 0.82 b | 34.19 ± 1.25 d | 30.19 ± 1.05 b | 31.29 ± 1.01 b,e | 42.79 ± 0.47 a |
| C16:1 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 5.10 ± 0.49 | ND |
| C17:0 | 9.22 ± 0.69 a | ND | 9.27 ± 0.45 a | 5.77 ± 0.55 b | 8.92 ± 0.38 a | ND | 8.56 ± 0.93 a |
| C 18:0 | 14.44 ± 0.75 a | 8.90 ± 0.52 b | 14.89 ± 1.37 a | 6.74 ± 0.49 c | 14.32 ± 0.55 a | 8.63 ± 0.78 b | 5.79 ± 0.33 c |
| C18:1 | ND | 1.84 ± 0.49 | ND | ND | ND | 9.46 ± 0.89 | ND |
| C20:0 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | 5.58 ± 0.81 | ND |
| C20:4 | 2.31 ± 0.27 b | 5.13 ± 0.57 a | 1.03 ± 0.14 c | ND | 0.96 ± 0.05 c,d | ND | ND |
| EPA | 2.32 ± 0.16 b | 5.24 ± 0.05 a | 1.60 ± 0.27 c | ND | 1.94 ± 0.14 b,c | ND | ND |
| DPA | 7.52 ± 0.60 b | 18.29 ± 0.78 a | 7.27 ± 0.78 b | 8.88 ± 0.41 b | 4.87 ± 0.41 d | 2.41± 0.12 c | 2.20 ± 0.13 c |
| DHA | 9.57± 0.68 b | 28.73 ± 1.28 a | 7.28 ± 0.21 c | 18.64 ± 0.59 d | 7.88 ± 0.54 b,c | 6.01 ± 0.53 c | 4.14 ± 0.28 c |
ND = not detected; Results are presented as mean ± SD, n = 3. Different superscript small letters (a,b,c,d,e) of each fatty acid obtained with various carbon sources indicate significant difference (Tukey’s test, p < 0.05).
Fatty acid composition (wt% of total fatty acids) of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 cultivated on 20 g/L of acetic acid (C2) or butyric acid (C4). Glucose (GC) was used as control.
| Fatty Acids (%) in Total Lipid | C2 | C4 | GC |
|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 | 2.85 ± 0.35 b | 6.67 ± 0.31 a | 8.33 ± 0.58 a |
| C15:0 | 10.32 ± 0.40 a | 2.60 ± 0.18 b | 8.03 ± 0.10 c |
| C 16:0 | 25.59 ± 0.43 a | 19.79 ± 0.77 b | 18.54 ± 1.04 b |
| C16:1 | 5.48 ± 0.68 | 2.37 ± 0.35 | ND |
| C 18:0 | 3.67 ± 0.17 b | 3.00 ± 0.53 b | 7.99 ± 0.40 a |
| C18:1 | ND | 1.33 ± 0.16 | ND |
| C20:4 | 1.74 ± 0.17 | 5.23 ± 0.53 | ND |
| EPA | 0.72 ± 0.13 b | 1.89 ± 0.48 a | 1.59 ± 0.43 a |
| DPA | 12.16 ± 0.14 c | 13.93 ± 0.48 b | 17.00 ± 0.62 a |
| DHA | 36.93 ± 0.69 a | 42.63 ± 1.08 b | 38.72 ± 1.04 a |
ND = not detected; Results are presented as mean ± SD, n = 3. Different superscript small letters (a,b,c) of each fatty acid obtained with various carbon sources indicate significant difference (Tukey’s test, p < 0.05).
Fatty acid composition (wt% of total fatty acids) of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 cultivated on 40 g/L of acetic acid (C2) or butyric acid (C4). Glucose (GC) was used as control.
| Fatty Acids (%) in Total Lipid | C2 | C4 | GC |
|---|---|---|---|
| C14:0 | 7.65 ± 0.23 a | 2.45 ± 0.17 b | 5.31 ± 0.04 b |
| C15:0 | 8.93 ± 0.28 b | 3.43 ± 0.18 c | 18.3 ± 0.76 a |
| C 16:0 | 22.78 ± 0.46 a | 20.34 ± 0.48 b | 15.58 ± 1.02 c |
| C17:0 | 7.11 ± 0.26 b | 1.02 ± 0.13 c | 11.74 ± 0.37 a |
| C 18:0 | 2.45 ± 0.91 b | 4.47 ± 0.73 a | 4.043 ± 0.40 a,b |
| C20:4 | 1.17 ± 0.14 | 5.28 ± 0.37 | ND |
| EPA | 1.65 ± 0.37 b | 3.12 ± 0.16 a | 0.82 ± 0.03 c |
| DPA | 17.94 ± 0.29 b | 23.35 ± 0.81 a | 14.54 ± 0.72 c |
| DHA | 30.40 ± 0.64 b | 36.25 ± 1.17 a | 29.58 ± 0.95 b |
ND = not detected; Results are presented as mean ± SD, n = 3. Different superscript small letters (a,b,c) of each fatty acid obtained with various carbon sources indicate significant difference (Tukey’s test, p < 0.05).
Figure 4DHA concentration and yield of Aurantiochytrium sp. T66 cultivated in 40 g/L of C2, C4 or glucose. Error bars express the standard deviation of the mean (n = 3). Different letters (a,b,c) above the bars in each group of results indicate significant difference (p < 0.05), based on one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test.