Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology

, Volume 172, Issue 1, pp 224–236 | Cite as

Effect of Operating Conditions in Production of Diagnostic Salmonella Enteritidis O-Antigen-Specific Monoclonal Antibody in Different Bioreactor Systems

  • Duygu Ayyildiz-Tamis
  • Ayse Nalbantsoy
  • Murat Elibol
  • Saime Ismet Deliloglu-Gurhan
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this study, different cultivation systems such as roller bottles (RB), 5-L stirred-tank bioreactor (STR), and disposable bioreactors were used to cultivate hybridoma for lab-scale production of Salmonella Enteritidis O-antigen-specific monoclonal antibody (MAb). Hybridoma cell line was cultivated in either serum-containing or serum-free medium (SFM) culture conditions. In STR, MAb production scaled up to 4 L, and production capabilities of the cells were also evaluated in different featured production systems. Moreover, the growth parameters of the cells in all production systems such as glucose consumption, lactate and ammonia production, and also MAb productivities were determined. Collected supernatants from the reactors were concentrated by a cross-flow filtration system. In conclusion, cells were not adapted to SFM in RB and STR. Therefore, less MAb titer in both STR and RB systems with SFM was observed compared to the cultures containing fetal bovine serum-supplemented medium. A higher MAb titer was gained in the membrane-aerated system compared to those in STR and RB. Although the highest MAb titer was obtained in the static membrane bioreactor system, the highest productivity was obtained in STR operated in semicontinuous mode with overlay aeration.

Keywords

Hybridoma Monoclonal antibody Salmonella Enteritidis Bioreactors Cross-flow filtration 

Nomenclature

dCO2

Dissolved carbon dioxide concentration (%)

dO2

Dissolved oxygen concentration (%)

kLa

Oxygen mass transfer coefficient

pMAb

MAb productivity (mg L−1 day−1)

qGlu

Specific glucose consumption rate (mg L−1 day−1 cell−1)

pLac

Specific lactate production rate (mg L−1 day−1 cell−1)

pAmmonia

Specific ammonia production rate (mg L−1 day−1 cell−1)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) with 108M578 project number.

References

  1. 1.
    Coradin, T., Nassif, N., & Livage, J. (2003). Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 61, 429–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Voigt, A., & Zintl, F. (1999). Journal of Biotechnology, 68, 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jain, E., & Kumar, A. (2008). Biotechnology Advances, 26, 46–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pol, L. V. D., & Tramper, J. (1998). Trends in Biotechnology, 16, 323–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Legazpi, L., Diaz, J., Laca, A., & Diaz, M. (2005). Biochemical Engineering Journal, 26, 122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ozturk, S. S., & Palsson, B. O. (1991). Biotechnology Progress, 7, 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ozturk, S. S., & Palsson, B. O. (1991). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 37, 35–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ozturk, S. S., Riley, M. R., & Palsson, B. O. (1992). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 39, 418–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ducommun, P., Ruffieux, P. A., Stockar, U., & Marison, I. (2001). Cytotech., 37, 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jan, D. C. H., Petch, D. A., Huzel, N., & Butler, M. (1997). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 54, 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kretzmer, G. (2002). Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 59, 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marks, D. M. (2003). Cytotech., 42, 21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nalbantsoy, A., Karaboz, I., & Deliloglu-Gurhan, I. (2010). HYBRIDOMA, 29, 414–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zijderveld, F. G. V., Bemmel-Zijderveld, A. M., & Anakotta, J. (1992). Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 30, 2560–2566.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nalbantsoy, A., Karaboz, I., & Deliloglu-Gurhan, I. (2010). Foodborne Pathogens and Disease, 7, 1521–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nalbantsoy, A., Bora, K., & Deliloglu-Gurhan, I. (2011). HYBRIDOMA, 30, 189–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nalbantsoy, A., Karaboz, I., Ivanova, R., & Deliloglu-Gurhan, I. (2011). Annals of Microbiology, 60, 565–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mirro, R., & Voll, K. (2009). BioProcess International., 7, 52–58.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Aslankaraoğlu, E., Gümüşderelioğlu, M., & Gürhan, S. I. (2003). Journal of Biomaterials Applications, 18, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Laemmli, U. K. (1970). Nature, 227, 680–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chu, L., & Robinson, D. K. (2003). Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 12, 180–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Even, M. S., Sandusky, C. B., & Barnard, N. D. (2006). Trends in Biotechnology, 24, 105–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim, D. Y., Lee, J. C., Chang, H. N., & Oha, D. J. (2006). Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 39, 426–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Selvarasu, S., Wong, V. V. T., Karimi, I. A., & Lee, D. Y. (2009). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 102, 1494–1504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ozturk, S. S., & Palsson, B. O. (1990). Journal of Biotechnology, 16, 259–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gambhir, A., Korke, R., Lee, J., Fu, P. J., Europa, A., & Hu, W. S. (2003). Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 95, 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dorka, P., Fischer, C., Budman, H., & Scharer, J. M. (2009). Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 32, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Matsunaga, N., Kano, K., Maki, Y., & Dobashi, T. (2009). Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 107, 419–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chisti, Y. (2000). Trends in Biotechnology, 18, 420–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krahe, M. (2003). Biochemical Engineering. In Ulmann’s encyclopedia of industrial chemistry (p. 2301). Weinheim: VCH Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    McQueen, A., & Bailey, J. E. (1990). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 35, 1065–1077.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cruza, H. J., Freitasa, C. M., Alvesa, P. M., Moreiraa, J. L., & Carrondoa, M. J. T. (2000). Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 27, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yang, S. T., Luo, J., & Chen, C. (2004). Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, 87, 61–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boraston, R., Thompson, P. W., Garland, S., & Birch, J. R. (1984). Developments in Biological Standardization, 55, 103–111.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Miller, W. M., Blanch, H. W., & Wilke, C. R. (1988). Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 32, 947–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sarkar, A. (2009). Laboratory methods, animal stem cells. In A. Sarkar (Ed.), Encyclopedia of stem cells (pp. 33–34). New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duygu Ayyildiz-Tamis
    • 1
  • Ayse Nalbantsoy
    • 1
  • Murat Elibol
    • 1
  • Saime Ismet Deliloglu-Gurhan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Bioengineering, Faculty of EngineeringEge UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations