Production of Trehalolipid Biosurfactants by Rhodococcus
Members of the genus Rhodococcus produce biosurfactants in response to the presence of liquid hydrocarbons in the growth medium. These biosurfactants are predominantly cell-bound glycolipids containing trehalose as the carbohydrate. Physiological roles of these glycolipids are diverse and involve participation in the uptake of water-insoluble substrates, promotion of the cell adhesion to hydrophobic surfaces, and increased rhodococcal resistance to physicochemical influences. In terms of surfactant characteristics (e.g., surface and interfacial tension, critical micelle concentration, emulsifying activity), Rhodococcus biosurfactants compete favorably with other microbial and synthetic surfactants. Additionally, biological activities of trehalolipids from rhodococci were revealed, including immunomodulating, antitumor, and anti-adhesive properties. Recently developed optimization procedures for their biosynthesis and recovery would broaden potential applications of Rhodococcus biosurfactants in new advanced technologies, such as environmental bioremediation, improved material construction, and biomedicine. The present chapter summarizes recent research on Rhodococcus biosurfactants and focuses on biosynthesis features, physicochemical and bioactive properties, and their potential applications.
This research was funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (State Task Registration No. 01201353246 for IEGM and State Task 6.3330.2017/4.6 for PSU).
- Alvarez HM, Silva RA, Cesari AC, Zamit AL, Peressutti SR, Reichelt R, Keller U, Malkus U, Rasch C, Maskow T, Mayer F, Steinbüchel A (2004) Physiological and morphological responses of the soil bacterium Rhodococcus opacus strain PD630 to water stress. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 50:75–86PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Biosurfactants market estimated to be worth $5.52 bn by 2022 (2018). Focus Surfactants 2018(2):4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fos.2018.02.014
- Bryant F (1990) Improved method for the isolation of biosurfactant glycolipids from Rhodococcus sp. strain H13A. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:494–149Google Scholar
- Choi K-S, Kim S-H, Lee T-H (1999) Purification and characterization of biosurfactant from Tsukamurella sp. 26A. J Microbiol Biotechnol 9:32–38Google Scholar
- Ivshina I, Kostina L, Krivoruchko A, Kuyukina M, Peshkur T, Anderson P, Cunningham C (2016) Removal of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil spiked with model mixtures of petroleum hydrocarbons and heterocycles using biosurfactants from Rhodococcus ruber IEGM 231. J Hazard Mater 312:8–17PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Kamenskikh TN, Kuyukina MS, Ivshina IB (2004) Some features in preserving actinobacteria of the genus Rhodococcus. Perm Univ Her Biol (2):110–113Google Scholar
- Kretschmer A, Wagner F (1983) Characterization of biosynthetic intermediates of trehalose dicorynomycolates from Rhodococcus erythropolis grown on n-alkanes. Appl Environ Microbiol 44:864–870Google Scholar
- Kuyukina MS, Ivshina IB, Korshunova IO, Stukova GI, Krivoruchko AV (2016) Diverse effects of a biosurfactant from Rhodococcus ruber IEGM 231 on the adhesion of resting and growing bacteria to polystyrene. AMB Express 6:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-016-0186-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Passeri A, Lang S, Wagner F, Wray V (1991) Marine biosurfactants, II. Production and characterization of an anionic trehalose tetraester from the marine bacterium Arthrobacter sp. EK 1. J Biosci 46:204–209Google Scholar
- Rapp P, Bock H, Urban E, Wagner F, Gebetsbergwer W, Schulzw W (1977) Mikrobielle Bildung eines Trehaloselipids und seine Anwendung in Modellversuchen zum Tensidfluten von Erdollagerstatten. Dechema-Monographien 81:177–186Google Scholar
- Stainsby FM, Philp JC, Dunbar S, Ivshina IB, Kuyukina MS (2005) Microbial foaming and bulking in activated sludge plants. In: Lehr JH, Keeley J, Lehr J, Kingery TB III (eds) Water encyclopedia: domestic, municipal, and industrial water supply and waste disposal. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp 844–848Google Scholar