nach oben

Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery

Erschienen in:

08.11.2022 | Original Article

Insights into the properties of bacterial cellulose produced by Acetobacter senegalensis MA1 and uncovering the novel bioactive metabolites of its spent medium

verfasst von: K. Aswini, N. O. Gopal, N. Shobana, Chitra Sudalaimani, Sivakumar Uthandi

Erschienen in: Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery | Ausgabe 16/2023

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Bacterial cellulose (BC) has several properties such as high purity, mechanical strength, crystallinity, biocompatibility, biodegradability, water holding, and thermal degrading capacity. The bioactive metabolites in the spent medium after the fermentation of BC also have several beneficial pharmaceutical applications. In this study, we demonstrated the structural property by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), thermal competency by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and differential scanning colorimeter (DSC) thermograms, mechanical efficiency by tensile strength, and crystallinity by X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis for the BC produced by Acetobacter senegalensis MA1, and we also investigated the novel metabolites produced by the bacterium. The assessments showed the similarity and superiority of BC with cotton cellulose (CC). The morphology and arrangement of cellulose fibrils were depicted by SEM. The tensile strength of dry BC mats was higher than that of wet mats. Also, along with exceptional thermal stability, BC has the I_β isoformic crystalline structure like CC. Hence, this study gives a better perception of the purity of BC than that of CC. Metabolite profiling by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS) for the spent medium showed the presence of several alkane hydrocarbons, such as fatty acid and amino acid derivatives, which can be used for vinegar production. The most important finding was the presence of polylactides and an antitumor compound deoxyspergualin, in the fermented broth. Considering several of these unique properties, BC has a broad application in the food, pharmaceutical, paper, and packaging industries, especially in the production of hydrogels and nanocomposites. Additionally, the spent broth can be purified by appropriate methods to obtain the pure form of bioactive metabolites, which can be used in food and medicine.

Graphical Abstract

Vorheriger Artikel Bacterial cellulose production from oil palm empty fruit bunch (OPEFB) hydrolysate using Komagataeibacter xylinus strain

Nächster Artikel Functional characterization of high-yield plant protein powder valorized from de-oiled sour cherry seed using microwave-assisted enzymatic extraction followed by spray- and freeze-drying

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Harris D, Bulone V, Ding SY, DeBolt S (2010) Tools for cellulose analysis in plant cell walls. Plant Physiol 153:420–426. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.154203CrossRef

Naomi R, Bt Hj Idrus R, Fauzi MB (2020) Plant-vs. Bacterial-derived cellulose for wound healing: a review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:6803. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186803

Shoda M, Sugano Y (2005) Recent advances in bacterial cellulose production. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 10:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02931175CrossRef

Illeghems K, Pelicaen R, De Vuyst L, Weckx S (2016) Assessment of the contribution of cocoa-derived strains of Acetobacter ghanensis and Acetobacter senegalensis to the cocoa bean fermentation process through a genomic approach. Food Microbiol 58:68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2016.03.013CrossRef

Ndoye B, Shafiei R, Sanaei NS, Cleenwerck I, Somda MK, Dicko MH, Thonart P (2022) Acetobacter senegalensis isolated from mango fruits: its polyphasic characterization and adaptation to protect against stressors in the industrial production of vinegar: a review. J Appl Microbiol 132:4130–4149. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.15495CrossRef

Anusuya RS, Anandham R, Kumutha K, Gayathry G, Mageshwaran V, Uthandi S (2020) Characterization and optimization of bacterial cellulose produced by Acetobacter spp. J Environ Biol 41(2):207–15. https://doi.org/10.22438/jeb/41/2/MRN-994

Aswini K, Gopal NO, Uthandi S (2020) Optimized culture conditions for bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter senegalensis MA1. BMC Biotechnol 20(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12896-020-00639-6CrossRef

Cerrutti P, Roldán P, García RM, Galvagno MA, Vázquez A, Foresti M. (2016) Production of bacterial nanocellulose from wine industry residues: Importance of fermentation time on pellicle characteristics. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 133(14). https://doi.org/10.1002/app.43109

Ullah MW, Ul-Islam M, Khan S, Kim Y, Park JK (2015) Innovative production of bio-cellulose using a cell-free system derived from a single cell line. Carbohyd Polym 132:286–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.06.037CrossRef

10.

Kim Y, Ullah MW, Ul-Islam M, Khan S, Jang JH, Park JK (2019) Self-assembly of bio-cellulose nanofibrils through intermediate phase in a cell-free enzyme system. Biochem Eng J 142:135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.11.017CrossRef

11.

Chawla PR, Bajaj IB, Survase SA, Singhal RS (2009) Microbial cellulose: fermentative production and applications. Food Technol Biotechnol 47(2):107–124. https://hrcak.srce.hr/38098

12.

Ullah MW, Manan S, Kiprono SJ, Ul-Islam M, Yang G (2019) Synthesis, structure, and properties of bacterial cellulose. Nanocellulose: from fundamentals to advanced materials 81–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527807437.ch4

13.

Brown RM, Willison JH, Richardson CL (1976) Cellulose biosynthesis in Acetobacter xylinum: visualization of the site of synthesis and direct measurement of the in-vivo process. Proc Natl Acad Sci 73(12):4565–9. http://www.pnas.org/content/73/12/4565. Accessed 6 May 2017

14.

Manan S, Ullah MW, Ul-Islam M, Shi Z, Gauthier M, Yang G (2022) Bacterial cellulose: molecular regulation of biosynthesis, supramolecular assembly, and tailored structural and functional properties. Prog Mater Sci 100972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.100972

15.

Farag S, Asker M, Mahmoud MG, Ibrahim H, Amr A (2016) Comparative study for bacterial cellulose production using Egyptian Achromobacter sp. Soher. Res J Pharm Biol Chem Sci 7(6):954–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.232

16.

Castro C, Zuluaga R, Álvarez C, Putaux JL, Caro G, Rojas OJ, Mondragon I, Gañán P (2012) Bacterial cellulose produced by a new acid-resistant strain of Gluconacetobacter genus. Carbohyd Polym 89(4):1033–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.03.045CrossRef

17.

Rani MU, Appaiah KA (2013) Production of bacterial cellulose by Gluconacetobacter hansenii UAC09 using coffee cherry husk. J Food Sci Technol 50(4):755–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0401-5CrossRef

18.

Mohammadkazemi F, Azin M, Ashori A (2015) Production of bacterial cellulose using different carbon sources and culture media. Carbohyd Polym 117:518–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.10.008CrossRef

19.

Khan T, Park JK, Kwon JH (2007) Functional biopolymers produced by biochemical technology considering applications in food engineering. Korean J Chem Eng 24(5):816–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-007-0047-1CrossRef

20.

Moosavi-Nasab M, Yousefi A (2011) Biotechnological production of cellulose by Gluconacetobacter xylinus from agricultural waste. Iran J Biotechnol 9(2):94–101

21.

Schrecker ST, Gostomski PA (2005) Determining the water holding capacity of microbial cellulose. Biotech Lett 27(19):1435–1438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-005-1465-yCrossRef

22.

Gayathry G, Gopalaswamy G (2014) Production and characterisation of microbial cellulosic fibre from Acetobacter xylinum. Indian J Fibre Text Res 39(1):93–96. http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/27372

23.

Tilak J, Uthandi S (2019) Bacterial Cellulose Dissolution for High-Value Nano Fibre Application. Madras Agric J 106(1–3):1. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ2019.000246

24.

Jayani T, Sanjeev B, Marimuthu S, Uthandi S (2020) Bacterial cellulose nano fiber (BCNF) as carrier support for the immobilization of probiotic, Lactobacillus acidophilus 016. Carbohyd Polym 250:116965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.116965CrossRef

25.

Shah J, Malcolm Brown R (2005) Toward electronic paper displays made from microbial cellulose. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 66(4):352–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-004-1756-6

26.

Jonas R, Farah LF (1998) Production and application of microbial cellulose. Polym Degrad Stab 59(1–3):101–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-3910(97)00197-3CrossRef

27.

Atta OM, Manan S, Shahzad A, Ul-Islam M, Ullah MW, Yang G (2022) Biobased materials for active food packaging: A review. Food Hydrocolloids 125:107419. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.16584CrossRef

28.

Pokalwar SU, Mishra MK, Manwar AV (2010) Production of cellulose by Gluconacetobacter sp. Recent Res Sci Technol 2(7):14–19

29.

Shibazaki HI, Kuga SH, Okano TA (1997) Mercerization and acid hydrolysis of bacterial cellulose. Cellulose 4(2):75–87. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024273218783CrossRef

30.

Klemm D, Schumann D, Udhardt U, Marsch S (2001) Bacterial synthesized cellulose—artificial blood vessels for microsurgery. Prog Polym Sci 26(9):1561–1603. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6700(01)00021-1CrossRef

31.

Chiaoprakobkij N, Seetabhawang S, Sanchavanakit N, Phisalaphong M (2019) Fabrication and characterization of novel bacterial cellulose/alginate/gelatin biocomposite film. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 30(11):961–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/09205063.2019.1613292CrossRef

32.

Novikov IV, Pigaleva MA, Naumkin AV, Badun GA, Levin EE, Kharitonova EP, Gallyamov MO (2021) Green approach for fabrication of bacterial cellulose-chitosan composites in the solutions of carbonic acid under high pressure CO₂. Carbohyd Polym 258:117614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2021.117614CrossRef

33.

Numata Y, Kono H, Tsuji M, Tajima K (2017) Structural and mechanical characterization of bacterial cellulose–polyethylene glycol diacrylate composite gels. Carbohyd Polym 173:67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.05.077CrossRef

34.

Unal S, Arslan S, Yilmaz BK, Oktar FN, Sengil AZ, Gunduz O (2021) Production and characterization of bacterial cellulose scaffold and its modification with hyaluronic acid and gelatin for glioblastoma cell culture. Cellulose 28(1):117–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03528-5CrossRef

35.

Yang Z, Ren L, Jin L, Huang L, He Y, Tang J, Wang H (2018) In-situ functionalization of poly (m-phenylenediamine) nanoparticles on bacterial cellulose for chromium removal. Chem Eng J 344:441–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.03.086CrossRef

36.

Dhar P, Etula J, Bankar SB (2019) In situ bioprocessing of bacterial cellulose with graphene: percolation network formation, kinetic analysis with physicochemical and structural properties assessment. ACS Appl Bio Mater 2(9):4052–4066. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.9b00581CrossRef

37.

Drozd R, Rakoczy R, Wasak A, Junka A, Fijałkowski K (2018) The application of magnetically modified bacterial cellulose for immobilization of laccase. Int J Biol Macromol 108:462–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.12.031CrossRef

38.

Roda A, Lucini L, Torchio F, Dordoni R, De Faveri DM, Lambri M (2017) Metabolite profiling and volatiles of pineapple wine and vinegar obtained from pineapple waste. Food Chem 229:734–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.02.111CrossRef

39.

Gil NY, Gwon HM, Yeo SH, Kim SY (2020) Metabolite profile and immunomodulatory properties of bellflower root vinegar produced using Acetobacter pasteurianus A11–2. Foods 9(8):1063. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9081063CrossRef

40.

Villarreal-Soto SA, Beaufort S, Bouajila J, Souch JP, Renard T, Rollan S, Taillandier P (2019) Impact of fermentation conditions on the production of bioactive compounds with anticancer, anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties in kombucha tea extracts. Process Biochem 83:44–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2019.05.004CrossRef

41.

Martínez-Leal J, Ponce-García N, Escalante-Aburto A (2020) Recent evidence of the beneficial effects associated with glucuronic acid contained in kombucha beverages. Curr Nutr Rep 9:163–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-020-00312-6CrossRef

42.

Mamlouk D, Gullo M (2013) Acetic acid bacteria: Physiology and carbon sources oxidation. Indian J Microbiol 53:377–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12088-013-0414-zCrossRef

43.

Antolak H, Piechota D, Kucharska A (2021) Kombucha tea—a double power of bioactive compounds from tea and symbiotic culture of bacteria and yeasts (SCOBY). Antioxidants 10(10):1541. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10101541CrossRef

44.

Ul-Islam M, Khan S, Ullah MW, Park JK (2019) Comparative study of plant and bacterial cellulose pellicles regenerated from dissolved states. Int J Biol Macromol 137:247–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.232CrossRef

45.

Hestrin S, Schramm MJ (1954) Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum. 2. Preparation of freeze-dried cells capable of polymerizing glucose to cellulose. Biochem J 58(2):345. https://doi.org/10.1042/bj0580345

46.

Smith BC (2011) Fundamentals of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. 2^nd ed., CRC press, Boca Raton, London, New York;pp. 1–175.

47.

Costa LM, de Olyveira GM, Basmaji P, Lauro Filho X (2011) Bacterial cellulose toward functional green composites materials. J Bionanosci 5(2):167–172. https://doi.org/10.1166/jbns.2011.1060CrossRef

48.

Surma-Ślusarska B, Presler S, Danielewicz D (2008) Characteristics of bacterial cellulose obtained from Acetobacter xylinum culture for application in papermaking. Fibres Text East Eur 16(4):108–111

49.

Tsouko E, Kourmentza C, Ladakis D, Kopsahelis N, Mandala I, Papanikolaou S, Paloukis F, Alves V, Koutinas A (2015) Bacterial cellulose production from industrial waste and by-product streams. Int J Mol Sci 16(7):14832–14849. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms160714832CrossRef

50.

Brandrup J, Immergut EH, Grulke EA, Abe A, Bloch DR (eds) (1989) Polymer handbook (Volume 7), 4th edn. Wiley, New York

51.

Elazzouzi-Hafraoui S, Nishiyama Y, Putaux JL, Heux L, Dubreuil F, Rochas C (2008) The shape and size distribution of crystalline nanoparticles prepared by acid hydrolysis of native cellulose. Biomacromol 9(1):57–65. https://doi.org/10.1021/bm700769pCrossRef

52.

Ibrahim AD, Musa K, Sani A, Aliero AA, Yusuf BS (2011) Microorganisms associated with the production of volatile compounds in spoilt tomatoes. Res Biotechnol 2(2):82–89. http://updatepublishing.com/journal/index.php/rib/article/view/2340. Accessed 25 April 2017

53.

Saleh AK, El-Gendi H, Soliman NA, El-Zawawy WK, Abdel-Fattah YR (2022) Bioprocess development for bacterial cellulose biosynthesis by novel Lactiplantibacillus plantarum isolate along with characterization and antimicrobial assessment of fabricated membrane. Sci Rep 12(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06117-7CrossRef

54.

Amorim LF, Fangueiro R, Gouveia IC (2022) Characterization of bioactive colored materials produced from bacterial cellulose and bacterial pigments. Materials 15(6):2069. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15062069CrossRef

55.

Rani MU, Appaiah A (2011) Optimization of culture conditions for bacterial cellulose production from Gluconacetobacter hansenii UAC09. Ann Microbiol 61(4):781–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-011-0196-7CrossRef

56.

Andritsou V, De Melo EM, Tsouko E, Ladakis D, Maragkoudaki S, Koutinas AA, Matharu AS (2018) Synthesis and characterization of bacterial cellulose from citrus-based sustainable resources. ACS Omega 3(8):10365–10373. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b01315CrossRef

57.

Sugiyama J, Persson J, Chanzy H (1991) Combined infrared and electron diffraction study of the polymorphism of native celluloses. Macromolecules 24(9):2461–2466. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00009a050CrossRef

58.

Oh SY, Yoo DI, Shin Y, Kim HC, Kim HY, Chung YS, Park WH, Youk JH (2005) Crystalline structure analysis of cellulose treated with sodium hydroxide and carbon dioxide by means of X-ray diffraction and FTIR spectroscopy. Carbohyd Res 340(15):2376–2391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2005.08.007CrossRef

59.

Kamiński K, Jarosz M, Grudzień J, Pawlik J, Zastawnik F, Pandyra P, Kołodziejczyk AM (2020) Hydrogel bacterial cellulose: a path to improved materials for new eco-friendly textiles. Cellulose 27(9):5353–5365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03128-3CrossRef

60.

Watanabe K, Tabuchi M, Morinaga Y, Yoshinaga F (1998) Structural features and properties of bacterial cellulose produced in agitated culture. Cellulose 5(3):187–200. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009272904582CrossRef

61.

Park JK, Khan T, Jung JY (2006) Structural studies of the glucuronic acid oligomers produced by Gluconacetobacter hansenii strain. Carbohyd Polym 63(4):482–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2005.10.004CrossRef

62.

Samouh Z, Cherkaoui O, Soulat D, Labanieh AR, Boussu F, Moznine RE (2021) Identification of the physical and mechanical properties of Moroccan Sisal yarns used as reinforcements for composite materials. Fibers 9(2):13. https://doi.org/10.3390/fib9020013CrossRef

63.

Yim SM, Song JE, Kim HR (2017) Production and characterization of bacterial cellulose fabrics by nitrogen sources of tea and carbon sources of sugar. Process Biochem 59:26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2016.07.001CrossRef

64.

Dayal MS, Catchmark JM (2016) Mechanical and structural property analysis of bacterial cellulose composites. Carbohyd Polym 144:447–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.02.055CrossRef

65.

McKenna BA, Mikkelsen D, Wehr JB, Gidley MJ, Menzies NW (2009) Mechanical and structural properties of native and alkali-treated bacterial cellulose produced by Gluconacetobacter xylinus strain ATCC 53524. Cellulose 16(6):1047–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-009-9340-yCrossRef

66.

Keshk SM, Sameshima K (2005) Evaluation of different carbon sources for bacterial cellulose production. African J Biotechnol 4(6):478–82. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajb2005.000-3087.

67.

Um IC, Ki CS, Kweon H, Lee KG, Ihm DW, Park YH (2004) Wet spinning of silk polymer: II. Effect of drawing on the structural characteristics and properties of filament. Int J Biol Macromol 34(1–2):107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2004.03.011

68.

Yang C, Chen C (2005) Synthesis, characterisation and properties of polyanilines containing transition metal ions. Synth Met 153(1–3):133–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.synthmet.2005.07.136CrossRef

69.

Manfredi LB, Rodríguez ES, Wladyka-Przybylak M, Vázquez A (2006) Thermal degradation and fire resistance of unsaturated polyester, modified acrylic resins and their composites with natural fibres. Polym Degrad Stab 91(2):255–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2005.05.003CrossRef

70.

Ouajai S, Shanks RA (2006) Solvent and enzyme induced recrystallization of mechanically degraded hemp cellulose. Cellulose 13(1):31–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-005-9020-5CrossRef

71.

Alvarez VA, Vázquez A (2004) Thermal degradation of cellulose derivatives/starch blends and sisal fibre biocomposites. Polym Degrad Stab 84(1):13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2003.09.003CrossRef

72.

Deepa B, Abraham E, Cherian BM, Bismarck A, Blaker JJ, Pothan LA, Leao AL, De Souza SF, Kottaisamy M (2011) Structure, morphology and thermal characteristics of banana nano fibers obtained by steam explosion. Biores Technol 102(2):1988–1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.09.030CrossRef

73.

Sabiha-Hanim S, Aziatul-Akma A (2016) Polymer characterization of cellulose and hemicellulose. Polymer Sci 404–11. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9488-565X

74.

Kim YM, Lee HW, Kim S, Watanabe C, Park YK (2015) Non-isothermal pyrolysis of citrus unshiu peel. Bioenergy Res 8(1):431–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-014-9534-5CrossRef

75.

Bigg DM (2005) Polylactide copolymers: Effect of copolymer ratio and end capping on their properties. Adv Polym Technol 24(2):69–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/adv.20032CrossRef

76.

George J, Ramana KV, Sabapathy SN, Jagannath JH, Bawa AS (2005) Characterization of chemically treated bacterial (Acetobacter xylinum) biopolymer: some thermo-mechanical properties. Int J Biol Macromol 37(4):189–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2005.10.007CrossRef

77.

Cheng KC, Catchmark JM, Demirci A (2009) Effect of different additives on bacterial cellulose production by Acetobacter xylinum and analysis of material property. Cellulose 16(6):1033–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-009-9346-5CrossRef

78.

Basmaji P, de Olyveira GM, Costa MM, Filho LX, Cordoba (2013) Role of culture medium in bacterial cellulose biosynthesis: Details. In: International workshop advance in cleaner production-Integrating Cleaner Production into Sustainability Strategies. Sau Paulo, Brazil, 2724–2733

79.

Kawai T, Rahman N, Matsuba G, Nishida K, Kanaya T, Nakano M, Okamoto H, Kawada J, Usuki A, Honma N, Nakajima K (2007) Crystallization and melting behavior of poly (L-lactic acid). Macromolecules 40(26):9463–9469. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma070082cCrossRef

80.

Barud HS, de Araújo Júnior AM, Santos DB, de Assunção RM, Meireles CS, Cerqueira DA, Rodrigues Filho G, Ribeiro CA, Messaddeq Y, Ribeiro SJ (2008) Thermal behavior of cellulose acetate produced from homogeneous acetylation of bacterial cellulose. Thermochim Acta 471(1–2):61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tca.2008.02.009CrossRef

81.

Lee KY, Blaker JJ, Bismarck A (2009) Surface functionalisation of bacterial cellulose as the route to produce green polylactide nanocomposites with improved properties. Compos Sci Technol 69(15–16):2724–2733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.08.016CrossRef

82.

Jung HI, Jeong JH, Lee OM, Park GT, Kim KK, Park HC, Lee SM, Kim YG, Son HJ (2010) Influence of glycerol on production and structural-physical properties of cellulose from Acetobacter sp. V6 cultured in shake flasks. Bioresource Technol 101(10):3602–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.111

83.

Manikandan Nair KM, Thomas S, Groeninckx G (2001) Thermal and dynamic mechanical analysis of polystyrene composites reinforced with short sisal fibres. Compos Sci Technol 61(16):2519–2529. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00170-1CrossRef

84.

Koyama M, Helbert W, Imai T, Sugiyama J, Henrissat B (1997) Parallel-up structure evidences the molecular directionality during biosynthesis of bacterial cellulose. Proc Natl Acad Sci 94(17):9091–9095. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.17.9091CrossRef

85.

Lee CM, Gu J, Kafle K, Catchmark J, Kim SH (2015) Cellulose produced by Gluconacetobacter xylinus strains ATCC 53524 and ATCC 23768: pellicle formation, post-synthesis aggregation and fiber density. Carbohyd Polym 133:270–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.06.091CrossRef

86.

Cheng KC, Catchmark JM, Demirci A (2011) Effects of CMC addition on bacterial cellulose production in a biofilm reactor and its paper sheets analysis. Biomacromol 12(3):730–736. https://doi.org/10.1021/bm101363tCrossRef

87.

Liitiä T, Maunu SL, Hortling B, Tamminen T, Pekkala O, Varhimo A (2003) Cellulose crystallinity and ordering of hemicelluloses in pine and birch pulps as revealed by solid-state NMR spectroscopic methods. Cellulose 10(4):307–316. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1027302526861CrossRef

88.

Bernardinelli OD, Lima MA, Rezende CA, Polikarpov I, deAzevedo ER (2015) Quantitative ¹³C MultiCP solid-state NMR as a tool for evaluation of cellulose crystallinity index measured directly inside sugarcane biomass. Biotechnol Biofuels 8(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-015-0292-1CrossRef

89.

Plowman J, Harrison SD Jr, Trader MW, Griswold DP Jr, Chadwick M, McComish MF, Zaharko D (1987) Preclinical antitumor activity and pharmacological properties of deoxyspergualin. Can Res 47(3):685–689

90.

Nishikawa K, Shibasaki C, Hiratsuka M, Arakawa M, Takahashi K, Takeuchi T (1991) Antitumor spectrum of deoxyspergualin and its lack of cross-resistance to other antitumor agents. J Antibiot 44(10):1101–1109. https://doi.org/10.7164/antibiotics.44.1101CrossRef

91.

Haigh WG, Förster HJ, Biemann K, Tattrie NH, Colvin JR (1973) Induction of orientation of bacterial cellulose microfibrils by a novel terpenoid from Acetobacter xylinum. Biochem J 135(1):145–149. https://doi.org/10.1042/bj1350145CrossRef

92.

Jayabalan R, Subathradevi P, Marimuthu S, Sathishkumar M, Swaminathan K (2008) Changes in free-radical scavenging ability of kombucha tea during fermentation. Food Chem 109(1):227–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.12.037CrossRef

93.

Amemiya H (1996) 15-Deoxyspergualin: a newly developed immunosuppressive agent and its mechanism of action and clinical effect: a review. Artif Organs 20(8):832–835. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1594.1996.tb04555.xCrossRef

94.

Ivanov K, Stoimenova A, Obreshkova D, Saso L (2013) Biotechnology in the production of pharmaceutical industry ingredients: amino acids. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip 27(2):3620–3626. https://doi.org/10.5504/BBEQ.2012.0134CrossRef

95.

Ratledge C (2004) Fatty acid biosynthesis in microorganisms being used for single cell oil production. Biochimie 86(11):807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2004.09.017CrossRef

96.

Ochsenreither K, Glück C, Stressler T, Fischer L, Syldatk C (2016) Production strategies and applications of microbial single cell oils. Front Microbiol 7:1539. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01539CrossRef

Titel: Insights into the properties of bacterial cellulose produced by Acetobacter senegalensis MA1 and uncovering the novel bioactive metabolites of its spent medium
verfasst von: K. Aswini
N. O. Gopal
N. Shobana
Chitra Sudalaimani
Sivakumar Uthandi
Publikationsdatum: 08.11.2022
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery / Ausgabe 16/2023
Print ISSN: 2190-6815
Elektronische ISSN: 2190-6823
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-03460-7

Springer Professional

Abstract

Graphical Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 16/2023

Production of gallic acid and relevant enzymes by Aspergillus niger and Aspergillus oryzae in solid-state fermentation of soybean hull and grape pomace

Optimization of multimetal adsorption by acid-treated Fabaceae biosorbent: kinetics and equilibrium

Effective utilization of waste sugarcane bagasse filler-reinforced glass fibre epoxy composites on its mechanical properties - waste to sustainable production

Influence of different extraction techniques on the extraction of phytochemicals and antioxidant activities from Syzygium cumini (jamun) pomace using Taguchi orthogonal array design: a qualitative and quantitative approach

Sustainable bioethanol production from enzymatically hydrolyzed second-generation Posidonia oceanica waste using stable Microbacterium metallidurans carbohydrate-active enzymes as biocatalysts

Recent progress on production technologies of food waste–based biochar and its fabrication method as electrode materials in energy storage application