title: Application of response surface methodology to enhancement of biomass production by Lactobacillus rhamnosus E/N.
abstract: Response surface methodology (RSM) was employed to study the effects of various medium components on biomass production by Lactobacillus rhamnosus E/N. This strain is commonly used in the pharmaceutical and food industries due to its beneficial effect on the human gut and general health. The best medium composition derived from RSM regression was (in g/l) glucose 15.44, sodium pyruvate 3.92, meat extract 8.0, potassium phosphate 1.88, sodium acetate 4.7, and ammonium citrate 1.88. With this medium composition biomass production was 23 g/l of dry cell weight after 18 h of cultivation in bioreactor conditions, whereas on MRS the yield of biomass was 21 g/l of dry cell weight. The cost of 1 g of biomass obtained on MRS broth was calculated at the level of 0.44 € whereas on the new optimal medium it was 25% lower. It may be concluded then, that the new medium, being cheaper than the control MRS allows large scale commercial cultivation of the L. rhamnosus strain. This study is of relevance to food industry because the possibility to obtain high yield of bacterial biomass is necessary step in manufacturing of probiotic food.
authors.affiliation: Department of Biotechnology, Human Nutrition and Science of Food Commodities, University of Life Sciences in Lublin , Skromna 8 20-704 Lublin , Poland.
authors.forename: Magdalena
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Polak-Berecka
authors.forename: Adam
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Waśko
authors.forename: Monika
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kordowska-Wiater
authors.forename: Zdzisław
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Targoński
authors.forename: Agnieszka
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kubik-Komar
keywords: Lactobacillus rhamnosus; biomass production; medium selection; response surface methodology
references.citation: J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2000 Jan;30(1):54-60
references.pmid: 10630440
references.citation: Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2000 Feb;53(2):159-66
references.pmid: 10709977
references.citation: J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2006 Sep;33(9):796-800
references.pmid: 16639576
references.citation: Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol. 2008;111:1-66
references.pmid: 18461293
references.citation: Indian J Med Microbiol. 2009 Jul-Sep;27(3):202-9
references.pmid: 19584499
references.citation: Int J Food Microbiol. 2005 Jul 15;102(2):137-42
references.pmid: 15992613
references.citation: J Biosci Bioeng. 2003;96(5):481-6
references.pmid: 16233559
references.citation: Microbes Infect. 2000 May;2(6):681-6
references.pmid: 10884619
references.citation: J Microbiol. 2006 Aug;44(4):439-46
references.pmid: 16953180
references.citation: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2000 Nov;83(3):F186-92
references.pmid: 11040166
references.citation: Clin Exp Allergy. 2000 Dec;30(12):1804-8
references.pmid: 11122221
references.citation: Biotechnol Lett. 2005 Nov;27(22):1785-9
references.pmid: 16314971
references.citation: Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009 Jul;75(13):4374-81
references.pmid: 19429565
references.citation: Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2004 Apr;85(3):191-8
references.pmid: 15031648
references.citation: J Agric Food Chem. 2008 Sep 10;56(17):7910-8
references.pmid: 18686970
references.citation: J Appl Microbiol. 2007 Apr;102(4):1043-51
references.pmid: 17381748