Isolation and Characterization of a Resident Tolerant Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Strain from a Spent Sulfite Liquor Fermentation Plant

Overview

Journal AMB Express

Date 2012 Dec 15

PMID 23237549

Citations 6

Authors

Violeta Sanchez I Nogue

Maurizio Bettiga

Marie F Gorwa-Grauslund

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Spent Sulfite Liquor (SSL) from wood pulping facilities is a sugar rich effluent that can be used as feedstock for ethanol production. However, depending on the pulping process conditions, the release of monosaccharides also generates a range of compounds that negatively affect microbial fermentation. In the present study, we investigated whether endogenous yeasts in SSL-based ethanol plant could represent a source of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains with a naturally acquired tolerance towards this inhibitory environment. Two isolation processes were performed, before and after the re-inoculation of the plant with a commercial baker's yeast strain. The isolates were clustered by DNA fingerprinting and a recurrent Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain, different from the inoculated commercial baker's yeast strain, was isolated. The strain, named TMB3720, flocculated heavily and presented high furaldehyde reductase activity. During fermentation of undiluted SSL, TMB3720 displayed a 4-fold higher ethanol production rate and 1.8-fold higher ethanol yield as compared to the commercial baker's yeast. Another non-Saccharomyces cerevisiae species, identified as the pentose utilizing Pichia galeiformis, was also recovered in the last tanks of the process where the hexose to pentose sugar ratio and the inhibitory pressure are expected to be the lowest.

Citing Articles

A novel AST2 mutation generated upon whole-genome transformation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae confers high tolerance to 5-Hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) and other inhibitors.

Vanmarcke G, Deparis Q, Vanthienen W, Peetermans A, Foulquie-Moreno M, Thevelein J PLoS Genet. 2021; 17(10):e1009826.

PMID: 34624020 PMC: 8500407. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009826.

Engineered for lignocellulosic valorization: a review and perspectives on bioethanol production.

Cunha J, Soares P, Baptista S, Costa C, Domingues L Bioengineered. 2020; 11(1):883-903.

PMID: 32799606 PMC: 8291843. DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2020.1801178.

Single and combined effects of acetic acid, furfural, and sugars on the growth of the pentose-fermenting yeast .

Perna M, Bastos R, Ceccato-Antonini S 3 Biotech. 2018; 8(2):119.

PMID: 29430380 PMC: 5803134. DOI: 10.1007/s13205-018-1143-0.

Adaptation to low pH and lignocellulosic inhibitors resulting in ethanolic fermentation and growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Narayanan V, Sanchez I Nogue V, van Niel E, Gorwa-Grauslund M AMB Express. 2016; 6(1):59.

PMID: 27566648 PMC: 5001960. DOI: 10.1186/s13568-016-0234-8.

Cell periphery-related proteins as major genomic targets behind the adaptive evolution of an industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain to combined heat and hydrolysate stress.

Wallace-Salinas V, Brink D, Ahren D, Gorwa-Grauslund M BMC Genomics. 2015; 16:514.

PMID: 26156140 PMC: 4496855. DOI: 10.1186/s12864-015-1737-4.

References

Xufre A, Albergaria H, Girio F, Spencer-Martins I . Use of interdelta polymorphisms of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains to monitor population evolution during wine fermentation. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2010; 38(1):127-32. DOI: 10.1007/s10295-010-0837-z. View

Hynes S, Kjarsgaard D, Thomas K, Ingledew W . Use of virginiamycin to control the growth of lactic acid bacteria during alcohol fermentation. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 1997; 18(4):284-91. DOI: 10.1038/sj.jim.2900381. View

Linden T, Peetre J, Hahn-Hagerdal B . Isolation and characterization of acetic acid-tolerant galactose-fermenting strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae from a spent sulfite liquor fermentation plant. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1992; 58(5):1661-9. PMC: 195655. DOI: 10.1128/aem.58.5.1661-1669.1992. View

Ulbricht R, Northup S, Thomas J . A review of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) in parenteral solutions. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1984; 4(5):843-53. DOI: 10.1016/0272-0590(84)90106-4. View

Almeida J, Karhumaa K, Bengtsson O, Gorwa-Grauslund M . Screening of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains with respect to anaerobic growth in non-detoxified lignocellulose hydrolysate. Bioresour Technol. 2009; 100(14):3674-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.02.057. View

Almeida J, Modig T, Roder A, Liden G, Gorwa-Grauslund M . Pichia stipitis xylose reductase helps detoxifying lignocellulosic hydrolysate by reducing 5-hydroxymethyl-furfural (HMF). Biotechnol Biofuels. 2008; 1(1):12. PMC: 2464581. DOI: 10.1186/1754-6834-1-12. View

du Toit W, Pretorius I, Lonvaud-Funel A . The effect of sulphur dioxide and oxygen on the viability and culturability of a strain of Acetobacter pasteurianus and a strain of Brettanomyces bruxellensis isolated from wine. J Appl Microbiol. 2005; 98(4):862-71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02549.x. View

Alvira P, Tomas-Pejo E, Ballesteros M, Negro M . Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: A review. Bioresour Technol. 2010; 101(13):4851-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.093. View

da Silva Filho E, de Melo H, Antunes D, dos Santos S, do Monte Resende A, Simoes D . Isolation by genetic and physiological characteristics of a fuel-ethanol fermentative Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain with potential for genetic manipulation. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2005; 32(10):481-6. DOI: 10.1007/s10295-005-0027-6. View

10.

Soares E . Flocculation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae: a review. J Appl Microbiol. 2010; 110(1):1-18. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04897.x. View

11.

Narendranath N, Hynes S, Thomas K, Ingledew W . Effects of lactobacilli on yeast-catalyzed ethanol fermentations. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997; 63(11):4158-63. PMC: 168732. DOI: 10.1128/aem.63.11.4158-4163.1997. View

12.

Basilio A, de Araujo P, de Morais J, da Silva Filho E, de Morais Jr M, Simoes D . Detection and identification of wild yeast contaminants of the industrial fuel ethanol fermentation process. Curr Microbiol. 2008; 56(4):322-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00284-007-9085-5. View

13.

Abbott D, Hynes S, Ingledew W . Growth rates of Dekkera/Brettanomyces yeasts hinder their ability to compete with Saccharomyces cerevisiae in batch corn mash fermentations. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2004; 66(6):641-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-004-1769-1. View

14.

Schell D, Dowe N, Ibsen K, Riley C, Ruth M, Lumpkin R . Contaminant occurrence, identification and control in a pilot-scale corn fiber to ethanol conversion process. Bioresour Technol. 2006; 98(15):2942-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.10.002. View

15.

de Souza Liberal A, da Silva Filho E, de Morais J, Simoes D, de Morais Jr M . Contaminant yeast detection in industrial ethanol fermentation must by rDNA-PCR. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2004; 40(1):19-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2004.01618.x. View

16.

Taherzadeh M, Gustafsson L, Niklasson C, Liden G . Physiological effects of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural on Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2000; 53(6):701-8. DOI: 10.1007/s002530000328. View

17.

Valente P, Ramos J, Leoncini O . Sequencing as a tool in yeast molecular taxonomy. Can J Microbiol. 1999; 45(11):949-58. DOI: 10.1139/w99-094. View

18.

Wahlbom C, Hahn-Hagerdal B . Furfural, 5-hydroxymethyl furfural, and acetoin act as external electron acceptors during anaerobic fermentation of xylose in recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2002; 78(2):172-8. DOI: 10.1002/bit.10188. View

19.

de Souza Liberal A, Basilio A, do Monte Resende A, Brasileiro B, da Silva-Filho E, de Morais J . Identification of Dekkera bruxellensis as a major contaminant yeast in continuous fuel ethanol fermentation. J Appl Microbiol. 2007; 102(2):538-47. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.03082.x. View

20.

Pampulha M, Loureiro-Dias M . Energetics of the effect of acetic acid on growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2000; 184(1):69-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2000.tb08992.x. View