Advertisement

Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering

, Volume 39, Issue 10, pp 1567–1575 | Cite as

Kinetic modeling of Moorella thermoacetica growth on single and dual-substrate systems

  • Elliott Schmitt
  • Renata Bura
  • Rick Gustafson
  • Mandana Ehsanipour
Original Paper

Abstract

Acetic acid is an important chemical raw material that can be produced directly from sugars in lignocellulosic biomass. Development of kinetic models that capture the bioconversion dynamics of multiple sugar systems will be critical to optimization and process control in future lignocellulosic biorefinery processes. In this work, a kinetic model was developed for the single- and dual-substrate conversion of xylose and glucose to acetic acid using the acetogen Moorella thermoacetica. Batch fermentations were performed experimentally at 20 g L−1 total sugar concentration using synthetic glucose, xylose, and a mixture of glucose and xylose at a 1:1 ratio. The product yield, calculated as total product formed divided by total sugars consumed, was 79.2, 69.9, and 69.7 % for conversion of glucose, xylose, and a mixture of glucose and xylose (1:1 ratio), respectively. During dual-substrate fermentation, M. thermoacetica demonstrated diauxic growth where xylose (the preferred substrate) was almost entirely consumed before consumption of glucose began. Kinetic parameters were similar for the single-substrate fermentations, and a strong linear correlation was determined between the maximum specific growth rate μ max and substrate inhibition constant, K s . Parameters estimated for the dual-substrate system demonstrated changes in the specific growth rate of both xylose and glucose consumption. In particular, the maximum growth rate related to glucose tripled compared to the single-substrate system. Kinetic growth is affected when multiple substrates are present in a fermentation system, and models should be developed to reflect these features.

Keywords

Moorella thermoacetica Acetic acid Kinetic model Dual substrate Anaerobic fermentation 

List of symbols

S

Substrate concentration (g L−1)

X

Cell mass concentration (g L−1)

P

Product concentration (g L−1)

rx

Reaction rate of cell growth (g L−1 h−1)

rs

Reaction rate of substrate consumption (g L−1 h−1)

rp

Reaction rate of product formation (g L−1 h−1)

μg,i

Specific growth rate (h−1)

μmax,gi

Maximum specific growth rate (h−1)

Ks

Substrate saturation constant (g L−1)

K1

Substrate inhibition constant

Pmax

Maximum product concentration before inhibition (g L−1)

Kd

Cell death rate constant (h−1)

Yxs

Cell growth yield from substrate (\({\text{g cells g}}^{ - 1} {\text{substrate}}\))

Ypx

Product yield from cells (\({\text{g product g}}^{ - 1} {\text{cells}}\))

Yps

Product yield from substrate, or effective product yield (\({\text{g product g}}^{ - 1} {\text{substrate}}\))

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project is supported by Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant No. 2011-68005-30407 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The University of Washington Denman Professorship Fund provided financial support.

References

  1. 1.
    Sauer M, Porro D, Mattanovich D, Branduardi P (2008) Microbial production of organic acids: expanding the markets. Trends Biotechnol 26:100–108. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2007.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bacovsky D, Ludwiczek N, Ognissanto M, Worgetter M (2013) Task 39 IEA Bioenergy. http://task39.org/2013/12/report-on-the-status-of-advanced-biofuels-demonstration-facilities-in-2012/. Accessed 01 June 2016
  3. 3.
    Juneja A, Kumar D, Murthy G (2013) Economic feasibility and environmental life cycle assessment of ethanol production from lignocellulosic feedstock in Pacific Northwest US. J Renew Sustain Energy 5:1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ewanick S, Schmitt E, Gustafson R, Bura R (2014) Use of Raman spectroscopy for continuous monitoring and control of lignocellulosic biorefinery processes. Pure Appl Chem 86:1321–1432. doi: 10.1515/pac-2013-1022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drake HL, Daniel SL (2004) Physiology of the thermophilic acetogen Moorella thermoacetica. Res Microbiol 155:422–436. doi: 10.1016/j.resmic.2004.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andreesen JR, Schaupp A, Neurauter C et al (1973) Fermentation of glucose, fructose, and xylose by Clostridium thermoaceticum: effect of metals on growth yield, enzymes, and the synthesis of acetate from CO2. J Bacteriol 114:743–751Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brumm PJ (1988) Fermentation of single and mixed substrates by the parent and an acid-tolerant, mutant strain of Clostridium thermoaceticum. Biotechnol Bioeng 32:444–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balasubramanian N, Kim JS, Lee YY (2001) Fermentation of xylose into acetic acid by Clostridium thermoaceticum. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 91–93:367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brownell JE, Nakas JP (1991) Bioconversion of acid-hydrolyzed poplar hemicellulose to acetic acid by Clostridium thermoaceticum. J Ind Microbiol 7:1–6. doi: 10.1007/BF01575595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harder W (1982) Strategies of mixed substrate utilization in microorganisms. Phi Trans R Soc Lond B 297:459–480. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1982.0055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gernaey KV, Lantz AE, Tufvesson P et al (2010) Application of mechanistic models to fermentation and biocatalysis for next-generation processes. Trends Biotechnol 28:346–354. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2010.03.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nishio N, Kuroda K, Nagai S et al (1990) Methanogenesis of glucose by defined thermophilic coculture of Clostridium thermoaceticum and Methanosarcina sp. J Ferment Bioeng 70:398–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang G, Wang D (1984) Elucidation of growth inhibition and acetic acid production by Clostridium thermoaceticum. Appl Environ Microbiol 47:294–298Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kwon Y, Engler C (2005) Kinetic models for growth and product formation on multiple substrates. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 10:587–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dowe N, McMillan J (2008) SSF experimental protocols-lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysis and fermentation, laboratory analytical procedure (LAP) NREL/TP-510-42630. http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/pdfs/42630.pdf
  16. 16.
    Yao KZ, Shaw BM, Kou B et al (2003) Modeling ethylene/butene copolymerization with multi-site catalysts: parameter estimability and experimental design. Polym React Eng 11:563–588. doi: 10.1081/PRE-120024426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schwartz RD, Keller FA (1982) Acetic acid production by Clostridium thermoaceticum in pH-controlled batch fermentations at acidic pH. Appl Environ Microbiol 43:1385–1392Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sugaya K, Tusé D, Jones J (1986) Production of acetic acid by Clostridium thermoaceticum in batch and continuous fermentations. Biotechnol Bioeng 28:678–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elliott Schmitt
    • 1
  • Renata Bura
    • 1
  • Rick Gustafson
    • 1
  • Mandana Ehsanipour
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Environmental and Forest SciencesUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations