, Volume 22, Issue 1–3, pp 65–78 | Cite as

CO2 in large-scale and high-density CHO cell perfusion culture

  • David R. Gray
  • Su Chen
  • William Howarth
  • Duane Inlow
  • Brian L. Maiorella
Special Issue


Productivity in a CHO perfusion culture reactor was maximized when pCO2 was maintained in the range of 30–76 mm Hg. Higher levels of pCO2 (> 150 mm Hg) resulted in CHO cell growth inhibition and dramatic reduction in productivity. We measured the oxygen utilization and CO2 production rates for CHO cells in perfusion culture at 5.55×10-17 mol cell-1 sec-1 and 5.36×10-17 mol cell-1 sec-1 respectively. A simple method to directly measure the mass transfer coefficients for oxygen and carbon dioxide was also developed. For a 500 L bioreactor using pure oxygen sparge at 0.002 VVM from a microporous frit sparger, the overall apparent transfer rates (kLa+kAA) for oxygen and carbon dioxide were 0.07264 min-1 and 0.002962 min-1 respectively. Thus, while a very low flow rate of pure oxygen microbubbles would be adequate to meet oxygen supply requirements for up to 2.1×107 cells/mL, the low CO2 removal efficiency would limit culture density to only 2.4×106 cells/mL. An additional model was developed to predict the effect of bubble size on oxygen and CO2 transfer rates. If pure oxygen is used in both the headspace and sparge, then the sparging rate can be minimized by the use of bubbles in the size range of 2–3 mm. For bubbles in this size range, the ratio of oxygen supply to carbon dioxide removal rates is matched to the ratio of metabolic oxygen utilization and carbon dioxide generation rates. Using this strategy in the 500 L reactor, we predict that dissolved oxygen and CO2 levels can be maintained in the range to support maximum productivity (40% DO, 76 mm Hg pCO2) for a culture at 107 cells/mL, and with a minimum sparge rate of 0.006 vessel volumes per minute.

A = volumetric agitated gas-liquid interfacial area at the top of the liquid, 1/m

B = cell broth bleeding rate from the vessel, L/min

CER = carbon dioxide evolution rate in the bioreactor, mol/min

[CO2] = dissolved CO2 concentration in liquid, M

[CO2]* = CO2 concentration in equilibrium with sparger gas, M

[CO2]** = CO2 concentration in equilibrium with headspace gas, M

CO2(1) = dissolved carbon dioxide molecule in water

[CT] = total carbonic species concentration in bioreactor medium, M

[CT]F = total carbonic species concentration in feed medium, M

D = bioreactor diameter, m

DI = impeller diameter, m

Db = the initial delivered bubble diameter, m

F = fresh medium feeding rate, L/min

HL = liquid height in the vessel, m

kA = carbon dioxide transfer coefficient at liquid surface, m/min

kinfAsupO= oxygen transfer coefficient at liquid surface, m/min

Key words

oxygen carbon dioxide CHO cell culture inhibition mass transfer coefficient bubbles 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aiba S, Humphery AE and Millis NF (1973) Biochemical Engineering (2nd edition), Chapter 6, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Aunins JG, Glazomitsky K and Buckland BC (1991) Aeration in pilot scale vessels for animal cell culture, presentation, AIChE Annual meeting, Los Angeles, CA, Nov. 17–22.Google Scholar
  3. Backer MP, Metzger LS, Slaber PL, Nevitt KL and Boder GB (1988) Large Scale Production of Monoclonal Antibodies in Suspension Culture., Biotechnol. and Bioeng. 32: 993–1000.Google Scholar
  4. Bavarian F, Fan LS and Chalmers JJ (1991) Microscopic visualization of insect cell-bubble interactions I: Rising bubbles, air-medium interface, and the foam layer., Biotechnol. Prog. 7: 140–150.Google Scholar
  5. Blumen T, AIChE Mtg Nov. 1993Google Scholar
  6. Bonarius HPJ, de Gooijer CD, Tramper J and Schmid G (1995) Carbon dioxide evolution rates in animal cell culture in bicarbonate buffered and bicarbonate free medium. In: RE Spier et al. (eds.), Animal Cell Technology. Proceedings of 13th ESACT Meeting, Butterworth-Heinemann Wiltshire UK.Google Scholar
  7. Chapman CM, Nienow AW and Middleton JC (1980) Surface aeration in a small, agitated, and sparged vessel. Biotechnol. and Bioeng. 22: 981–993.Google Scholar
  8. Drapeau D, SIM Annual Meeting, Orlando Florida, August 1990.Google Scholar
  9. Ganz MB, Boyarski G, Sterzel RB and Boron WF (1989) Arginine vasopressin enhances pHi regulation in the presence of HCOinf3sup- by stimulating three acid-base transport systems, Nature 337: 648–651.Google Scholar
  10. Ingham J, Piehl H, Dittmar KEJ and Lehmann J (1984) Repeated Fed-Batch Cultivation of Lymphocytic Cells. Proceedings of the Third Congress on Biotechnology, Munich 10–14 September 1994.Google Scholar
  11. Itagaki A and Kimura G (1974) Tes and HEPES buffers in mammalian cell cultures and viral studies: problem of carbon dioxide requirement Exp. Cell Res. 83(2), (p. 351–61).Google Scholar
  12. Jones RP and Greenfield PF (1982) Effect of carbon dioxide on yeast growth and fermentation. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 4: 210–22.Google Scholar
  13. Krapf R, Berry CA, Alpern RJ and Rector FC Jr (1988) Regulation of cell pH by ambient bicarbonate, carbon dioxide tension, and pH in the rabbit proximal convoluted tubule. J. Clin. Invest. 81: 381–389.Google Scholar
  14. Lovrecz G and Gray PP (1994) Use of on-line gas analysis to monitor recombinant mammalian cell cultures.Google Scholar
  15. Madshus IH (1988) Regulation of intracellular pH in eukaryotic cells, Biochem. J. 250: 1–8.Google Scholar
  16. Maiorella B (1994) Recombinant Sub Unit Vaccines, Eng Found, Cell Cult. Eng., San Diego March 7–12 1994.Google Scholar
  17. Murhammer DW and Goochee CF (1988) Scale up of Insect Cell Cultures: Protective effects of Pluronic F-68, Bio/Technology 6: 1411–1418.Google Scholar
  18. Onken U and Liefke E (1989) Effect of total and partial pressure (Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide) on aerobic microbial processes. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, 40, p. 137–169, Ed A. Fiechte.Google Scholar
  19. Perrin DD and Dempsey B (1974) Buffers for pH and Metal Ion control. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  20. Radlett PJ, Telling RC, Whitside JP and Maskell MA (1972) The supply of oxygen to submerged cultures of BHK 21 Cells. Biotechnol. and Bioeng. 14: 437–445.Google Scholar
  21. Roos A and Boron WF (1981) Intracellular pH. Physiological Reviews, 61, p. 296–434, April 1981.Google Scholar
  22. Stumm W and Morgan JJ (1981) Aquatic Chemistry, Chapter 4. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Urlaub G and Chasin A (1980) Isolation of Chinese hamster cell mutants deficient in dihydrofolate reductase activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 77, p. 4216–4220.Google Scholar
  24. Weiss SA, Peplow D, Smith GC, Vaughn JL and Doughery E (1985) Biotechnical aspects of a large scale process for insect cells and baculoviruses, in Techniques in the Lifesciences, Cell Biology—Volume C1 (pp. 1–16) Elsevier.Google Scholar
  25. Yoon S-J and Konstantinov K (1994) Continuous real-time monitoring of oxygen uptake rate (OUR) in animal cell bioreactors. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 44 (p. 170–177).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • David R. Gray
    • 1
  • Su Chen
    • 1
  • William Howarth
    • 1
  • Duane Inlow
    • 1
  • Brian L. Maiorella
    • 1
  1. 1.Process Development DepartmentChiron CorporationEmeryvilleU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations