The Effect of Antifoam Addition on Protein Production Yields

  • Sarah J. RoutledgeEmail author
  • Roslyn M. Bill
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 866)


Pichia pastoris is a widely used host for recombinant protein production. The foaming associated with culturing it on a large scale is commonly prevented by the addition of chemical antifoaming agents or “antifoams.” Unexpectedly, the addition of a range of antifoams to both shake flask and bioreactor cultures of P. pastoris has been shown to alter the total yield of the recombinant protein being produced. Possible explanations for this are that the presence of the antifoam increases the total amount of protein being produced and secreted per cell or that it increases the density of the culture. Antifoaming agents may therefore have specific effects on the growth and yield characteristics of recombinant cultures, in addition to their primary action as de-foamers.

Key words

Antifoam Protein Foam destruction yield kLa Viability 


  1. 1.
    Holmes WJ, Smith R, Bill RM (2006) Evaluation of antifoams in the expression of a recombinant FC fusion protein in shake flask cultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microb Cell Fact 5:30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Varley J, Brown A, Boyd R, Dodd P, Gallagher S (2004) Dynamic multipoint measurement of foam behaviour for a continuous fermentation over a range of key process variables. Biochem Eng J 20:61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Höefer R, Jost F, Schwuger MJ, Scharf R, Geke J, Kresse J, Lingman H, Veitenhansl R, Erwied W (2000) Uilmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. Wiley-VCMGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Joshi K, Jeelani S, Blickenstorfer C, Naegeli I, Windhab E (2005) Influence of fatty alcohol antifoam suspensions on foam stability. Colloids Surf A 263:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Denkov ND, Krastanka M, Christova C, Hadjiiski A, Cooper P (2000) Mechanisms of action of mixed solid–liquid antifoams: 3. Exhaustion and reactivation. Langmuir 21:8163–8619Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Al-Masry W (1999) Effects of antifoam and scale-up on operation of bioreactors. Chem Eng Process 38:197–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arjunwadkar SJ, Sarvanan K, Kulkarni PR, Pandit AB (1998) Gas–liquid mass transfer in dual impeller bioreactor. Biochem Eng J 1:99–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Calik P, Ileri N, Erdinc BI, Aydogan N, Argun M (2005) Novel antifoam for fermentation processes: fluorocarbon-hydrocarbon hybrid unsymmetrical bolaform surfactant. Langmuir 21:8613–8619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koch V, Rüffer H, Schügerl K, Innertsberger E, Menzel H, Weis J (1995) Effect of antifoam agents on the medium and microbial cell properties and process performance in small and large reactors. Process Biochem 30:435–446Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morao A, Maia C, Fonseca M, Vasconcelos J, Alves S (1999) Effect of antifoam addition in gas–liquid mass transfer in stirred fermenters. Bioprocess Eng 20:165–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Koide K, Yamazoe S, Harada S (1985) Effects of surface-active substances on gas hold up and gas–liquid mass transfer in bubble column. J Chem Eng Jpn 18:287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu H-S, Chiung W-C, Wang Y-C (1994) Effect of lard oil and castor oil on oxygen transfer in an agitated fermentor. Biotechnol Tech 8:17–20Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yagi H, Yoshida F (1974) Oxygen absorption in fermenters – effects of surfactants, antifoaming agents and sterilized cells. J Ferment Technol 52:905–916Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stanbury PF, Whittaker A, Hall SJ (1995) Principles of fermentation technology, 2nd edn. Butterworth Heinemann, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Routledge SJ, Hewitt CJ, Bora N, Bill RM (2011) Antifoam addition to shake flask cultures of recombinant Pichia pastoris increases yield. Microb Cell Fact 10:17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Denkov ND, Tcholakova S, Marinova KG, Hadjiiski A (2002) Role of oil spreading for the efficiency of mixed oil–solid antifoams. Langmuir 18:5810–5817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bartsch O (1924) Über Schaumsysteme. Fortschrittsberichte über Kolloide und Polymere 20:1–49Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bandyopadhyay P, Humphrey AE (1967) Dynamic measurement of the volumetric oxygen transfer coefficient in fermentation systems. Biotechnol Bioeng 9:533–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Life and Health SciencesAston UniversityBirminghamUK
  2. 2.School of Life & Health Sciences and Aston Research Centre for Healthy AgeingAston UniversityBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations