Spore inoculum quality in filamentous bioprocesses is a critical parameter influencing pellet morphology and, consequently, process performance. It is essential to determine the concentration of viable spores before inoculation, to implement quality control and decrease batch-to-batch variability. The ability to assess the spore physiologic status with close-to-real time resolution would offer interesting perspectives enhanced process analytical technology (PAT) and quality by design (QbD) strategies. Up to now, the parameters contributing to spore inoculum quality are not clearly defined. The state-of-the-art method to investigate this variable is colony-forming unit (CFU) determination, which assesses the number of growing spores. This procedure is tedious, associated with significant inherent bias, and not applicable in real time.
Here, a novel method is presented, based on the combination of viability staining (propidium iodide and fluorescein diacetate) and large-particle flow cytometry. It is compatible with the complex medium background often observed in filamentous bioprocesses and allows for a classification of the spores into different subpopulations. Next to viable spores with intact growth potential, dormant or inactive as well as physiologically compromised cells are accurately determined. Hence, a more holistic few on spore inoculum quality and early-phase biomass composition is provided, offering enhanced information content.
In an industrially relevant model bioprocess, good correlation to CFU counts was found. Morphological parameters (e.g. spore swelling) that are not accessible via standard monitoring tools were followed over the initial process phase with close temporal resolution.
Filamentous fungi Flow cytometry Viability staining Spore quality Bioprocess development
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
This study was funded by the Christian Doppler Gesellschaft (grant number 171).
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Brul S, Nussbaum J, Dielbandhoesing SK (1997) Fluorescent probes for wall porosity and membrane integrity in filamentous fungi. J Microbiol Methods 28:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Budde BB, Rasch M (2001) A comparative study on the use of flow cytometry and colony forming units for assessment of the antibacterial effect of bacteriocins. Int J Food Microbiol 63:65–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Bunthof CJ, van den Braak S, Breeuwer P, Rombouts FM, Abee T (1999) Rapid fluorescence assessment of the viability of stressed Lactococcus lactis. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:3681–3689PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
d’Enfert C (1997) Fungal spore germination: insights from the molecular genetics of Aspergillus nidulans and Neurospora crassa. Fungal Genet Biol 21:163–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz M, Herrero M, García LA, Quirós C (2010) Application of flow cytometry to industrial microbial bioprocesses. Biochem Eng J 48:385–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehgartner D, Sagmeister P, Herwig C, Wechselberger P (2015) A novel real-time method to estimate volumetric mass biodensity based on the combination of dielectric spectroscopy and soft-sensors. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 90:262–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher J, Morton G (1970) Physiology of germination of Penicillium griseofulvum conidia. Trans Brit Mycol Soc 54:65–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hua SS, Brandl MT, Hernlem B, Eng JG, Sarreal SB (2011) Fluorescent viability stains to probe the metabolic status of aflatoxigenic fungus in dual culture of Aspergillus flavus and Pichia anomala. Mycopathologia 171:133–138. doi:10.1007/s11046-010-9352-zCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Hyka P, Züllig T, Ruth C, Looser V, Meier C, Klein J, Melzoch K, Meyer HP, Glieder A, Kovar K (2010) Combined use of fluorescent dyes and flow cytometry to quantify the physiological state of Pichia pastoris during the production of heterologous proteins in high-cell-density fed-batch cultures. Appl Environ Microbiol 76:4486–4496. doi:10.1128/AEM.02475-09CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Jones KH, Senft JA (1985) An improved method to determine cell viability by simultaneous staining with fluorescein diacetate-propidium iodide. J Histochem Cytochem 33:77–79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Kell DB, Kaprelyants AS, Weichart DH, Harwood CR, Barer MR (1998) Viability and activity in readily culturable bacteria: a review and discussion of the practical issues. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 73:169–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Lein J (1986) The Panlabs penicillin strain improvement program. In: Vanek Z, Hostalek Z (eds) Overproduction of microbial metabolites. Butterworths, Boston, pp 105–139Google Scholar
Liao RS, Rennie RP, Talbot JA (1999) Assessment of the effect of amphotericin B on the vitality of Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 43:1034–1041PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Martin JF, Nicolas G, Villanueva JR (1973) Chemical changes in the cell walls of conidia of Penicillium notatum during germination. Can J Microbiol 19:789–796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Mesquita N, Portugal A, Pinar G, Loureiro J, Coutinho AP, Trovao J, Nunes I, Botelho ML, Freitas H (2013) Flow cytometry as a tool to assess the effects of gamma radiation on the viability, growth and metabolic activity of fungal spores. Int Biodeter Biodegr 84:250–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz B, Kossen NWF (1977) The growth of molds in the form of pellets—a literature review. Biotechnol Bioeng 19:781–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff J, Bellgardt K (1995) A morphology-based model for fed-batch cultivations of Penicillium chrysogenum growing in pellet form. J Biotechnol 38:201–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen J (1992) Modelling the growth of filamentous fungi. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 46:187–223PubMedGoogle Scholar
O’Brien MC, Bolton WE (1995) Comparison of cell viability probes compatible with fixation and permeabilization for combined surface and intracellular staining in flow cytometry. Cytometry 19:243–255. doi:10.1002/cyto.990190308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Paul GC, Kent CA, Thomas CR (1993) Viability testing and characterization of germination of fungal spores by automatic image analysis. Biotechnol Bioeng 42:11–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Posch AE, Herwig C (2014) Physiological description of multivariate interdependencies between process parameters, morphology and physiology during fed-batch penicillin production. Biotechnol Prog 30:689–699. doi:10.1002/btpr.1901CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Quiros C, Herrero M, Garcia LA, Diaz M (2007) Application of flow cytometry to segregated kinetic modeling based on the physiological states of microorganisms. Appl Env Microbiol 73:3993–4000. doi:10.1128/AEM.00171-07CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rieseberg M, Kasper C, Reardon KF, Scheper T (2001) Flow cytometry in biotechnology. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 56:350–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Rotman B, Papermaster BW (1966) Membrane properties of living mammalian cells as studied by enzymatic hydrolysis of fluorogenic esters. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 55:134–141CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Schnürer J, Rosswall T (1982) Fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis as a measure of total microbial activity in soil and litter. Appl Env Microbiol 43:1256–1261Google Scholar
Ueckert J, Breeuwer P, Abee T, Stephens P, von Caron GN, ter Steeg PF (1995) Flow cytometry applications in physiological study and detection of foodborne microorganisms. Int J Food Microbiol 28:317–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Veal DA, Deere D, Ferrari B, Piper J, Attfield PV (2000) Fluorescence staining and flow cytometry for monitoring microbial cells. J Immunol Methods 243:191–210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Vermes I, Haanen C, Reutelingsperger C (2000) Flow cytometry of apoptotic cell death. J Immunol Methods 243:167–190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar