» Articles » PMID: 32034454

A Robust Flow Cytometry-based Biomass Monitoring Tool Enables Rapid At-line Characterization of S. Cerevisiae Physiology During Continuous Bioprocessing of Spent Sulfite Liquor

Overview
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2020 Feb 9
PMID 32034454
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Assessment of viable biomass is challenging in bioprocesses involving complex media with distinct biomass and media particle populations. Biomass monitoring in these circumstances usually requires elaborate offline methods or sophisticated inline sensors. Reliable monitoring tools in an at-line capacity represent a promising alternative but are still scarce to date. In this study, a flow cytometry-based method for biomass monitoring in spent sulfite liquor medium as feedstock for second generation bioethanol production with yeast was developed. The method is capable of (i) yeast cell quantification against medium background, (ii) determination of yeast viability, and (iii) assessment of yeast physiology though morphological analysis of the budding division process. Thus, enhanced insight into physiology and morphology is provided which is not accessible through common online and offline biomass monitoring methods. To demonstrate the capabilities of this method, firstly, a continuous ethanol fermentation process of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with filtered and unfiltered spent sulfite liquor media was analyzed. Subsequently, at-line process monitoring of viability in a retentostat cultivation was conducted. The obtained information was used for a simple control based on addition of essential nutrients in relation to viability. Thereby, inter-dependencies between nutrient supply, physiology, and specific ethanol productivity that are essential for process design could be illuminated. Graphical abstract.

Citing Articles

Use of a sample injection loop for an accurate measurement of particle number concentration by flow cytometry.

Shin H, Yang I, Park S, Lee J Anal Bioanal Chem. 2024; 416(20):4481-4490.

PMID: 38926227 PMC: 11294435. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-024-05387-6.


Comparative Zymocidial Effect of Three Different Killer Toxins against Spoilage Yeasts.

Agarbati A, Ciani M, Esin S, Agnolucci M, Marcheggiani F, Tiano L Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(2).

PMID: 36674823 PMC: 9866123. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24021309.


Flow cytometry-based viability staining: an at-line tool for bioprocess monitoring of Sulfolobus acidocaldarius.

Rastadter K, Tramontano A, Wurm D, Spadiut O, Quehenberger J AMB Express. 2022; 12(1):107.

PMID: 35947320 PMC: 9365904. DOI: 10.1186/s13568-022-01447-1.


In situ quantification of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) and biomass in Cupriavidus necator by a fluorescence spectroscopic assay.

Kettner A, Noll M, Griehl C Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2022; 106(2):635-645.

PMID: 35015141 PMC: 8763931. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-021-11670-8.


Adaptation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a concentrated spent sulphite liquor waste stream for increased inhibitor resistance.

Brandt B, Garcia-Aparicio M, Gorgens J, van Zyl W Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021; 106(1):455-468.

PMID: 34870737 DOI: 10.1007/s00253-021-11710-3.


References
1.
Helle S, Murray A, Lam J, Cameron D, Duff S . Xylose fermentation by genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae 259ST in spent sulfite liquor. Bioresour Technol. 2003; 92(2):163-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2003.08.011. View

2.
Novy V, Krahulec S, Longus K, Klimacek M, Nidetzky B . Co-fermentation of hexose and pentose sugars in a spent sulfite liquor matrix with genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioresour Technol. 2013; 130:439-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.11.115. View

3.
Jonsson L, Alriksson B, Nilvebrant N . Bioconversion of lignocellulose: inhibitors and detoxification. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2013; 6(1):16. PMC: 3574029. DOI: 10.1186/1754-6834-6-16. View

4.
Henningsen B, Hon S, Covalla S, Sonu C, Argyros D, Barrett T . Increasing anaerobic acetate consumption and ethanol yields in Saccharomyces cerevisiae with NADPH-specific alcohol dehydrogenase. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015; 81(23):8108-17. PMC: 4651100. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.01689-15. View

5.
Venkata Mohan S, Nikhil G, Chiranjeevi P, Reddy C, Rohit M, Kumar A . Waste biorefinery models towards sustainable circular bioeconomy: Critical review and future perspectives. Bioresour Technol. 2016; 215:2-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.03.130. View