Advertisement

Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 971–978 | Cite as

The potential of a natural biopolymeric flocculant, ε-poly-l-lysine, for harvesting Chlorella ellipsoidea and its sustainability perspectives for cost and toxicity

  • Won Noh
  • Seonghwan Park
  • Sang-Jun Lee
  • Byung-Gon Ryu
  • Jungmin KimEmail author
Research Paper
  • 66 Downloads

Abstract

The successful production of microalgal biomass requires the precise coordination of many different steps. Cell harvesting is a central process in all methods currently used for the production of microalgal biomass. Therefore, improving the harvesting process itself, and using a harvesting method that is compatible with adjacent steps, is necessary to prevent problems that may occur during downstream processing. This study examined the potential of the cationic biopolymer ε-poly-l-lysine (ε-PLL) for use in the harvest of microalgae (Chlorella ellipsoidea). The effects of ε-PLL concentration and mixing intensity on flocculation efficiency and operating costs were determined. We found that ε-PLL was not toxic to microalgal cells at concentrations of up to 25 mg/L, based on the photosystem II quantum yield. A recovery rate of 95% was achieved using 19 mg/L ε-PLL, and the estimated harvest cost was 20 US$/ton of harvested biomass. Moreover, ε-PLL displayed antimicrobial properties, leaving the harvested biomass intact and pure. Therefore, the use of ε-PLL-induced flocculation appears to be an attractive option when harvesting microalgal biomass for use as low- and high-value commodities for humans or animals.

Keywords

Chlorella ellipsoidea ε-Poly-l-lysine Flocculation Biomass harvest Response surface methodology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Korea Institute of Toxicology (Grant KK-1805).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

449_2019_2098_MOESM1_ESM.doc (332 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 332 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Skjånes K, Rebours C, Lindblad P (2013) Potential for green microalgae to produce hydrogen, pharmaceuticals and other high value products in a combined process. Crit Rev Biotechnol 33:172–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Norsker NH, Barbosa MJ, Vermuë MH, Wijffels RH (2011) Microalgal production—a close look at the economics. Biotechnol Adv 29:24–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Noh W, Kim J, Lee SJ, Ryu BG, Kang CM (2018) Harvesting and contamination control of microalgae Chlorella ellipsoidea using the bio-polymeric flocculant α-poly-l-lysine. Biores Technol 249:206–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gupta SK, Ansari FA, Bauddh K, Singh B, Nema AK, Pant KK (2017) Harvesting of microalgae for biofuels: comprehensive performance evaluation of natural, inorganic, and synthetic flocculants. In: Singh R, Kumar S (eds) Green technologies and environmental sustainability. Springer, Switzerland, p 492Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim J, Yoo G, Lee H, Lim J, Kim K, Kim CW, Park MS, Yang JW (2013) Methods of downstream processing for the production of biodiesel from microalgae. Biotechnol Adv 31:862–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoshida T, Nagasawa T (2003) ε-Poly-l-lysine: microbial production, biodegradation and application potential. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 62:21–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pandey AK, Kumar A (2014) Improved microbial biosynthesis strategies and multifarious applications of the natural biopolymer epsilon-poly-l-lysine. Process Biochem 49:496–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shima S, Matsuoka H, Iwamoto T, Sakai H (1984) Antimicrobial action of e-poly-l-lysine. J Antibiot 37:1449–1455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shih IL, Van YT, Shen MH (2004) Biomedical applications of chemically and microbiologically synthesized poly (glutamic acid) and poly (lysine). Mini Rev Med Chem 4:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barros AI, Gonçalves AL, Simões M, Pires JCM (2015) Harvesting techniques applied to microalgae: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41:1489–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Perreault F, Dewez D, Fortin C, Juneau P, Diallo A, Popovic R (2010) Effect of aluminum on cellular division and photosynthetic electron transport in Euglena gracilis and Chlamydomonas acidophila. Environ Toxicol Chem 29:887–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peng C, Li S, Zheng J, Huang S, Li D (2017) Harvesting microalgae with different sources of starch-based cationic flocculants. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 181:112–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roselet F, Vandamme D, Roselet M, Muylaert K, Abreu PC (2017) Effects of pH, salinity, biomass concentration, and algal organic matter on flocculant efficiency of synthetic versus natural polymers for harvesting microalgae Biomass. Bioenergy Res 10:427–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Furukawa H, Kato Y, Inoue Y, Kato T, Tada Y, Hashimoto S (2012) Correlation of power consumption for several kinds of mixing impellers. Int J Chem Eng 2012:106496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    WEC (2017) 2017 World energy trilemma index. World Energy Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li YH, Wu T, Yang WD, Li HY, Liu JS (2014) The effectiveness of five natural products against three species of harmful algae. Water Environ J 28:270–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chang Y, McLandsborough L, McClements DJ (2012) Cationic antimicrobial (ε-Polylysine)—anionic polysaccharide (Pectin) interactions: influence of polymer charge on physical stability and antimicrobial efficacy. J Agric Food Chem 60:1837–1844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choy SY, Prasad KMN, Wu TY, Raghunandan ME, Phang SM, Juan JC, Ramanan RN (2018) Starch-based flocculant outperformed aluminium sulfate hydrate and polyaluminium chloride through effective bridging for harvesting acicular microalga Ankistrodesmus. Algal Res 29:343–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roselet F, Vandamme D, Roselet M, Muylaert K, Abreu PC (2015) Screening of commercial natural and synthetic cationic polymers for flocculation of freshwater and marine microalgae and effects of molecular weight and charge density. Algal Res 10:183–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Choi HJ (2015) Effect of eggshells for the harvesting of microalgae species. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 29:666–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zheng H, Gao Z, Yin J, Tang X, Ji X, Huang H (2012) Harvesting of microalgae by flocculation with poly (γ-glutamic acid). Biores Technol 112:212–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rashid N, Rehman SU, Han JI (2013) Rapid harvesting of freshwater microalgae using chitosan. Process Biochem 48:1107–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Banerjee C, Ghosh S, Sen G, Mishra S, Shukla P, Bandopadhyay R (2013) Study of algal biomass harvesting using cationic guar gum from the natural plant source as flocculant. Carbohydr Polym 92:675–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Duan J, Gregory J (2003) Coagulation by hydrolysing metal salts. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 100:475–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vandamme D, Gheysen L, Muylaert K, Foubert I (2018) Impact of harvesting method on total lipid content and extraction efficiency for Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Sep Purif Technol 194:362–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim J, Ryu BG, Lee YJ, Han JI, Kim W, Yang JW (2014) Continuous harvest of marine microalgae using electrolysis: effect of pulse waveform of polarity exchange. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 37:1249–1259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu J, Zhu Y, Tao Y, Zhang Y, Li A, Li T, Sang M, Zhang C (2013) Freshwater microalgae harvested via flocculation induced by pH decrease. Biotechnol Biofuels 6:98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Seo YH, Sung M, Kim B, Oh YK, Kim DY, Han JI (2015) Ferric chloride based downstream process for microalgae based biodiesel production. Biores Technol 181:143–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Danquah MK, Ang L, Uduman N, Moheimani N, Forde GM (2009) Dewatering of microalgal culture for biodiesel production: exploring polymer flocculation and tangential flow filtration. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 84:1078–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vandamme D, Foubert I, Fraeye I, Meesschaert B, Muylaert K (2012) Flocculation of Chlorella vulgaris induced by high pH: role of magnesium and calcium and practical implications. Biores Technol 105:114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim J, Ryu BG, Kim K, Kim BK, Han JI, Yang JW (2012) Continuous microalgae recovery using electrolysis: effect of different electrode pairs and timing of polarity exchange. Biores Technol 123:164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biomass Research Group, Gyeongnam Department of Environmental Toxicology and ChemistryKorea Institute of ToxicologyJinju-siRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Freshwater Bioresources Utilization BureauNakdonggang National Institute of Biological ResourcesSangju-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations