Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology

, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 477–479 | Cite as

Temperature dependence of growth, enzyme secretion and activity of psychrophilic Antarctic bacteria

  • G. Feller
  • E. Narinx
  • J. L. Arpigny
  • Z. Zekhnini
  • J. Swings
  • C. Gerday
Applied Microbial and Cell Physiology Short Contribution

Abstract

Five psychrophilic Antarctic bacteria have been selected for their capacity to secrete exoenzymes into culture medium. These strains are able to grow from 0 to about 25° C. However, production of lipase fromMoraxella, α-amylase fromAlteromonas haloplanctis, β-lactamase fromPsychrobacter immobilis and protease fromBacillus is maximal at temperatures close to that of their environment (—2 to 4° C) and is strongly inhibited at higher temperatures. This thermal effect involves alterations in the secretory pathway in the upper range of temperatures, losses due to the enzyme thermal lability and in some cases to reduction in cell development. The apparent optimal activity temperature of these enzymes is between 30 and 40° C, i.e. about 20° C lower than that of their mesophilic counterparts.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dambmann C, Aunstrup K (1981) The variety of serine proteases and their industrial significance. In: Turk V, Vitale L (eds) Proteinases and their inhibitors. Structure, function and applied aspects. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 231–244Google Scholar
  2. Feller G, Thiry M, Arpigny JL, Gerday C (1991) Cloning and expression inEscherichia coli of three lipase-encoding genes from the psychrotrophic Antarctic strainMoraxella TA144. Gene 102:111–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Gounot A-M (1991) Bacterial life at low temperature: physiological aspects and biotechnological implications. J Appl Bacteriol 71:386–397PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hägele EO, Kratzer M, Schaich E, Rauscher E (1989) Mechanism of action of human pancreatic and salivary α-amylase on 4,6-ethylidene-α-4-nitrophenyl maltoheptaoside substrate. Clin Chem 35:188–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hazen GG, Hause JA, Hubicki JA (1965) An automated system for the quantitative determination of proteolytic enzymes using azocasein. Ann N Y Acad Sci 130:761–768PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Khalid A, Rahim A, Lee BH (1991) Production and characterization of β-galactosidase from psychrotrophicBacillus subtilis KL88. Biotechnol Appl Biochem 13:246–256Google Scholar
  7. Kobori H, Sullivan CW, Shizuya H (1984) Heat-labile phosphatase from Antarctic bacteria: rapid 5′ end-labeling of nucleic acids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:6691–6695Google Scholar
  8. Kolenc RJ, Inniss WE, Glick BR, Robinson CW, Mayfield CI (1988) Transfer and expression of mesophilic plasmid-mediated degradative capacity in a psychrotrophic bacterium. Appl Environ Microbiol 54:638–641PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Morita RY (1975) Psychrophilic bacteria. Bacteriol Rev 39:144–167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Margesin R, Schinner F (1991) Characterization of a metalloprotease from psychrophilicXanthomonas maltophilia. FEMS Microbiol Lett 79:257–262Google Scholar
  11. Russell NJ (1990) Cold adaptation of micro-organisms. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B326:595–611Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Feller
    • 1
  • E. Narinx
    • 1
  • J. L. Arpigny
    • 1
  • Z. Zekhnini
    • 1
  • J. Swings
    • 2
  • C. Gerday
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Biochemistry, Institute of Chemistry B6University of LiegeLiegeBelgium
  2. 2.Laboratory of MicrobiologyUniversity of GentGentBelgium

Personalised recommendations