Scopulariopsis brevicaulis: Effect of pH and substrate on growth

  • R. J. Bothast
  • E. B. Lancaster
  • C. W. Hesseltine
Food Microbiology

Summary

Scopulariopsis brevicaulis Bainier NRRL 5867, isolated from ammonia-treated corn during preservation studies, was grown in shaken and still liquid cultures on Blakeslee's malt extract. The medium was adjusted to different pH values between 5.0 and 10.6 with sodium hydroxide and ammonium hydroxide. Maximum mycelium was produced at an initial pH of 9.0–10.0. Considerably more mycelium was produced in shaken flasks than in still cultures. When the initial pH was adjusted to 10.0 with ammonium hydroxide, 1350 mg mycelium/200 ml Blakeslee's malt extract was produced in contrast to 540 mg with sodium hydroxide. Approximately 28% of the total solids and 25% of the nitrogen in an ammoniated corn infusion broth were converted to mold mycelium high in essential amino acids and protein by both NRRL 5867 and NRRL 3273, another strain ofS. brevicaulis. WhenS. brevicaulis was grown 7 days on a solid substrate of ammoniated corn, ammonia was converted to organic material, carbohydrate was utilized and the protein of the fermented corn increased in lysine and methionine. Approximately 9% of the weight of the corn was lost during the process.

Keywords

Ammonium Corn Carbohydrate Hydroxide Mold 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AOAC. (1970). Official methods of analysis. 11th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  2. Bainier, G. (1970a). Bull. Soc. Mycol. Fr. 23, 98–105Google Scholar
  3. Bainier, G. (1970b). Bull. Soc. Mycol. Fr. 23, 125–127Google Scholar
  4. Bothast, R.J., Adams, G.H., Hatfield, E.E., Lancaster, E.B. (in press) J. Dairy Sci.Google Scholar
  5. Bothast, R.J., Lancaster, E.B., Hesseltine, C.W. (1973). J. Dairy Sci. 56, 241–245Google Scholar
  6. Christensen, C.M., Nelson, G.H., Mirocha, C.J., Bates, F. (1968). Cancer Res. 28, 2293–2295PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dennis, C., Gee, J.M. (1973). J. Gen. Microbiol. 78, 101–107Google Scholar
  8. Frazier, W.C. (1958). Food microbiology. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Halbrook, E.R., Winter, A.R., Sutton, T.S. (1951). Poultry Sci. 30, 381–388Google Scholar
  10. Lancaster, E.B., Hall, G.E., Brekke, O.L. (1974). Trans. ASAE 17, 331–338Google Scholar
  11. Lorah, M.E., Funk, E.M., Forward, J. (1954). Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull. 573Google Scholar
  12. Lovett, J. (1972). Poultry Sci. 51, 309–313Google Scholar
  13. Lovett, J., Messer, J.W., Read, R.B. (1971). Poultry Sci. 50, 746–751Google Scholar
  14. Martin, P.M.D., Gilman, G.A., Keen, P. (1971). The incidence of fungi in foodstuffs and their significance based on a survey in the Eastern Transvaal and Swaziland. In: Symposium on Mycotoxins in Human Health, pp. 281–289, Ed. I.F.H. Purchase. The Macmillan Co., LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Morton, A.G., Broadbent, D. (1955). J. Gen. Microbiol. 12, 248–258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Morton, A.G., MacMillan, A. (1954). J. Exp. Bot. 5, 232–252Google Scholar
  17. Morton, F.J., Smith, G. (1963). Mycological Papers, No. 86Google Scholar
  18. Pike, R., Brown, M.L. (1967). Nutrition: An integrated approach. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Raper, K.B., Thom, C. (1949). A manual of the penicillia. Bailliere, Tindall & Cox, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Rhodes, R.A., Hall, H.H., Anderson, R.F., Nelson, G.E.N., Shekleton, M.C., Jackson, R.W. (1961). Appl. Microbiol. 9, 181–184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Schefferle, H.E. (1965). J. Appl. Bacteriol. 28, 403–411PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Thom, C. (1930). The penicillia. Bailliere, Tindall & Cox, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Thom, C., Raper, K.B. (1932). Science 76, 548–550Google Scholar
  24. Uhl, D.E., Lancaster, E.B., Vojnovich, C. (1971). Anal. Chem. 43, 990–994Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. J. Bothast
    • 1
  • E. B. Lancaster
    • 1
  • C. W. Hesseltine
    • 1
  1. 1.Northern Regional Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research ServiceU.S. Department of AgriculturePeoria

Personalised recommendations