Abstract
The current study represents the isolation and characterization of cellulose producing bacteria from rotten grape fruit. The best Bacterial Cellulose producer isolated from rotten grape fruit was identified as Komagataeibacter saccharivorans BC-G1 upon biochemical and molecular characterization. Bacterial Cellulose production was done in Hestrin and Schramm (HS) medium under static condition. Studies showed that BC was produced as a thick layer on the surface of medium and yield of BC was 14 g/L after 96 h of fermentation period. BC films were characterized by Scanning Electron Microscopy, Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy and X-ray Diffraction. SEM analysis revealed the presence of highly extended interwoven cellulose fibrils. Characteristics of FTIR spectrum depicted the presence of characteristic absorption bands and less crystalline behavior of BC. XRD patterns demonstrated three major characteristic diffraction peaks corresponding to (110), (100) and (002) indicating presence of less crystalline behavior of BC produced in this study. Results confirmed the produced biopolymer by K. saccharivorans BC-G1 is BC.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- BC:
-
Bacterial Cellulose
- HMP:
-
Hexose monophosphate pathway
- TCA:
-
Tricarboxylic acid
- UDPG:
-
Uridine diphosphate glucose
- SEM:
-
Scanning electron microscope
- FTIR:
-
Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
- XRD:
-
X-ray diffraction
- HS:
-
Hestrin-Schramm
- BLAST:
-
Basic Local Alignment Search Tool
- MEGA:
-
Molecular Evolutionary Genetic Analysis
- CR:
-
Crystallinity Ratio
- RPM:
-
Rotation per minute
References
Aydın YA, Aksoy ND (2014) Isolation and characterization of an efficient bacterial cellulose producer strain in agitated culture: Gluconacetobacter hansenii P2A. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:1065–1075. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-013-5296-9
Bodea IM, Beteg FI, Pop CR, David AP, Dudescu MC, Vilău C, Stănilă A, Rotar AM, Cătunescu GM (2021) Optimization of moist and oven-dried bacterial cellulose production for functional properties. Polymers 13:2088. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13132088
Brandão PR, Crespo MT, Nascimento FX (2022) Phylogenomic and comparative analyses support the reclassification of several Komagataeibacter species as novel members of the Novacetimonas gen. nov. and bring new insights into the evolution of cellulose synthase genes. Int J Syst Evo Microbiol 72:005252. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijsem.0.005252
Buchanan ER, Gibbons NE (1975) Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. Williams & Wilkins
Ciolacu D, Ciolacu F, Popa VI (2011) Amorphous cellulose-structure and characterization. Cell Chem Technol 45:13
Costa AFS, Rocha MAV, Sarubbo LA (2017) Bacterial cellulose: an ecofriendly biotextile. Int J Text Fashion Technol 7:11–26
Gopu G, Govindan S (2018) Production of bacterial cellulose from Komagataeibacter saccharivorans strain BC1 isolated from rotten green grapes. Prep Biochem Biotech 48:842–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826068.2018.1513032
Hestrin S, Schramm M (1954) Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum. 2. Preparation of freeze-dried cells capable of polymerizing glucose to cellulose. Biochem J 58:345. https://doi.org/10.1042/bj0580345
Ioelovich M (2021) Preparation, characterization and application of amorphized cellulose-a review. Polym (Basel) 13:4313. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13244313
Ioelovich MY, Veveris GP (1987) Determination of cellulose crystallinity by X-ray diffraction method. J Wood Chem 5:72–80
Jose G, Shalumon KT, Chen JP (2020) Natural polymers-based hydrogels for cell culture applications. Curr Med Chem 27:2734–2776. https://doi.org/10.2174/0929867326666190903113004
Kadier A, Ilyas RA, Huzaifah MRM, Harihastuti N, Sapuan SM, Harussani MM, Ishak MR (2021) Use of industrial wastes as sustainable nutrient sources for bacterial cellulose (BC) production: mechanism, advances, and future perspectives. Polymers 13:3365. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13193365
Kovárová-Kovar K, Egli T (1998) Growth kinetics of suspended microbial cells: from single-substrate-controlled growth to mixed-substrate kinetics. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62:646–666. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.62.3.646-666.1998
Kumar S, Stecher GLi M, Knyaz C, Tamura K (2018) MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across computing platforms. Mol Biol Evol 35:1547–1549. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy096
Lahiri D, Nag M, Dutta B, Dey A, Sarkar T, Pati S, Edinur HA, Abdul Kari Z, Mohd Noor NH, Ray RR (2021) Bacterial cellulose: production, characterization, and application as antimicrobial agent. Int J Mol Sci 22:12984. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms222312984
Mangayil R, Rissanen AJ, Pammo A et al (2021) Characterization of a novel bacterial cellulose producer for the production of eco-friendly piezoelectric-responsive films from a minimal medium containing waste carbon. Cellulose 28:671–689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03551-6
Mathur G, Dua A, Das AR, Kaur H, Kukal S, Sharma P, Mathur A (2015) Bacteria cellulose: biopolymer from Gluconacetobacter xylinus. Macromol Symp 347:27–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.201400041
Mikkelsen D, Flanagan BM, Dykes GA, Gidley MJ (2009) Influence of different carbon sources on bacterial cellulose production by Gluconacetobacter xylinus strain ATCC 53524. J Appl Microbiol 107:576–583. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.200904226.x
Mohite BV, Patil SV (2014) Physical, structural, mechanical and thermal characterization of bacterial cellulose by G. hansenii NCIM 2529. Carbohyd Polym 106:132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.02.012
Molina-Ramírez C, Castro C, Zuluaga R, Gañán P (2018) Physical characterization of bacterial cellulose produced by Komagataeibacter medellinensis using food supply chain waste and agricultural by-products as alternative low-cost feedstocks. J Polym Environ 26:830–837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-017-0993-6
Molina-Ramírez C, Castro M, Osorio M, Torres-Taborda M, Gómez B, Zuluaga R, Gómez C, Gañán P, Rojas OJ, Castro C (2017) Effect of different carbon sources on bacterial nanocellulose production and structure using the low pH resistant strain Komagataeibacter medellinensis. Mater (Basel Switzerland) 10:639. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10060639
Nelson ML, O’Connor RT (1964) Relation of certain infrared bands to cellulose crystallinity and crystal latticed type. Part I. Spectra of lattice types I, II, III and of amorphous cellulose. J Appl Polym Sci 8:1311–1324. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1964.070080322
Oh SY, Yoo DI, Shin Y, Seo G (2005) FTIR analysis of cellulose treated with sodium hydroxide and carbon dioxide. Carbohyd Res 340:417–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2004.11.027
Poletto M, Ornaghi HL, Zattera AJ (2014) Native cellulose: structure, characterization and thermal properties. Materials7:6105–6119. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7096105
Powers EM, Latt TG (1977) Simplified 48-hour IMVIC test: an agar plate method. Appl Enviro Microb 34:274–279. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.34.3.274-279.1977
Rangaswamy BE, Vanitha KP, Hungund BS (2015) Microbial cellulose production from bacteria isolated from rotten fruit. Int J Poly Sci Article ID 280784:8pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/280784
Rastogi A, Singh J, Das M, Kundu D, Banerjee R (2018) An understanding of bacterial cellulose and its potential impact on industrial applications. In: Kuila A, Sharma V (eds) Principles and applications of fermentation technology. Wiley, Hoboken. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119460381.ch20
Revin VV, Liyas’kina EV, Sapunova NB (2020) Isolation and characterization of the strains producing bacterial cellulose. Microbiology 89:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0026261720010130
Römling U, Galperin MY (2015) Bacterial cellulose biosynthesis: diversity of operons, subunits, products and functions. Trends Microbiol 23:545–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2015.05.005
Ross P, Mayer R, Benziman M (1991) Cellulose biosynthesis and function in bacteria. Microbiol Rev 55:35–58. https://doi.org/10.1128/mr.55.1.35-58.1991
Saichana N, Matsushita K, Adachi O, Frébort I, Frebortova J (2015) Acetic acid bacteria: A group of bacteria with versatile biotechnological applications. BiotechnoL Adv 33:1260–1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.12.001
Segal G (1991) The geometry of the KdV equation. Int J Mod Phys A 6:2859–2869. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X91001416
Sharafi S, Rasool I, Beheshti-Maal K (2010) Isolation, characterization and optimization of indigenous acetic acid bacteria and evaluation of their preservation methods. Iran J Microbiol 2:38–45
Sharma P, Mathur G, Dhakate SR, Chand S, Goswami N, Sharma SK, Mathur A (2016a) Evaluation of physicochemical and biological properties of chitosan/poly (vinyl alcohol) polymer blend membranes and their correlation for vero cell growth. Carbohyd Polym 137:576–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.10.096
Singh O, Panesar PS, Chopra HK (2017) Isolation and characterization of cellulose producing bacterial isolate from rotten grapes. Biosci Biotech Res Asia 14:373–380. https://doi.org/10.13005/bbra/2455
Sharma R, Mathur A, Goswami N, Mathur G (2016b) Effect of carbon sources on physicochemical properties of bacterial cellulose produced from Gluconacetobacter xylinus MTCC 7795. e-Polymers 16:331–336. https://doi.org/10.1515/epoly-2016b-0047
Srivastava S, Mathur G (2021) Bacterial Cellulose: A Versatile Biopolymer. In. P. Gauba, R. Gabrani & G. Mathur (Eds.), Recent Trends in Biosciences and Biotechnology, Delhi pp.76–96
Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 22:4673–4678. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/22.22.4673
Thongwai N, Futui W, Ladpala N, Sirichai B, Weechan A, Kanklai J, Rungsirivanich P (2022) Characterization of bacterial cellulose produced by Komagataeibacter maltaceti P285 isolated from contaminated honey wine. Microorganisms 10:528. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030528
Vasconcelos NF, Andrade FK, Vieira L, D A P, Vieira RS, Vaz JM, Chevallier P, de Freitas Rosa M (2020) Oxidized bacterial cellulose membrane as support for enzyme immobilization: properties and morphological features. Cellulose 27:3055–3083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-02966-5
Vigentini I, Vincenzo F, Federico D, Sergio R, Isabella A, Cristiano M, Maurizio B, Roberto F (2019) Set-up of bacterial cellulose production from the genus Komagataeibacter and its use in a gluten-free bakery product as a case study. Front Microbiol 10: 1953. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.01953
Vos P, Garrity G, Jones D, Krieg NR, Ludwig W, Rainey FA, Whitman WB (eds) (2011) Bergey’s manual of systematic bacteriology: Volume 3: The Firmicutes, vol 3. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68489-5
Wang J, Tavakoli J, Tang Y (2019) Bacterial cellulose production, properties and applications with different culture methods-A review. Carbohyd Polym 219:63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.05.008
Yamada Y (2016) Systematics of acetic acid bacteria. In: Matsushita K, Toyama H, Tonouchi N, Okamoto-Kainuma A (eds) Acetic Acid Bacteria. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55933-7_1
Yao H, Dai Q, You Z (2015) Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy characterization of aging-related properties of original and nano-modified asphalt binders. Constr Build Mater 101:1078–1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.085
Zhang W, Wang X, Qi X, Ren L, Qiang T (2018a) Isolation and identification of a bacterial cellulose synthesizing strain from kombucha in different conditions: Gluconacetobacter xylinus ZHCJ618. Food Sci Biotechnol 27:705–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-018-0303-7
Zhang Z, Schwartz S, Wagner L, Miller W (2000b) A greedy algorithm for aligning DNA sequences. J Comput Biol 7:203–214. https://doi.org/10.1089/10665270050081478
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the Department of Biotechnology and Department of Physics and Materials Science and Engineering, Jaypee Institute of Information Technology, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India for providing necessary facilities to execute this work.
Funding
The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The authors listed above have equal contributions. The submitted work is part of the doctoral research of Mr. Samriddh Srivastava, done under the guidance of Dr. Garima Mathur. The authors acknowledge AIRF, Jawahar Lal Nehru University, New Delhi, for SEM facilities, and Material Characterization Lab, PMSE department, JIIT Noida for FTIR and XRD facilities.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in the publication.
Competing interests
The authors have no financial and nonfinancial competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Srivastava, S., Mathur, G. Komagataeibacter saccharivorans strain BC-G1: an alternative strain for production of bacterial cellulose. Biologia 77, 3657–3668 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-022-01222-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-022-01222-4