Bioprospecting of Microorganism-Based Industrial Molecules. Группа авторовЧитать онлайн книгу.
Mousavi, F., Beheshti‐Maal, K., and Massah, A. (2015). Production of sophorolipid from an identified current yeast, Lachancea thermotolerans BBMCZ7FA20, isolated from honey bee. Current Microbiology 71 (2): 303–310.
79 79 Souza, K.S.T., Gudiña, E.J., Azevedo, Z. et al. (2017). New glycolipid biosurfactants produced by the yeast strain Wickerhamomyces anomalus CCMA 0358. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 154: 373–382.
80 80 Morita, T., Ishibashi, Y., Fukuoka, T. et al. (2011). Production of glycolipid biosurfactants, cellobiose lipids, by Cryptococcus humicola JCM 1461 and their interfacial properties. Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry 75 (8): 1597–1599.
81 81 Paraszkiewicz, K., Kanwal, A., and Długoński, J. (2002). Emulsifier production by steroid transforming filamentous fungus Curvularia lunata. Growth and product characterization. Journal of Biotechnology 92 (3): 287–294.
82 82 Bhardwaj, G., Cameotra, S.S., and Chopra, H.K. (2013). Biosurfactants from fungi: a review. Journal of Petroleum & Environmental Biotechnology 4 (6): 1–6.
83 83 Ahuja, K. and Singh, S. (2019). Biosurfactant market Size. Delaware, USA. Global Market Insights. https://www.gminsights.com/pressrelease/biosurfactants‐market‐size (Revised 5 August 2020).
84 84 Nishanthi, R., Kumaran, S., Palani, P. et al. (2010). Screening of biosurfactants from hydrocarbon degrading bacteria. Journal of Ecobiotechnology 2 (5): 47–53.
85 85 Saravanan, V. and Vijayakumar, S. (2012). Isolation and screening of biosurfactant producing microorganisms from oil contaminated soil. Journal of Academia and Industrial Research 1 (5): 264–268.
86 86 Cai, Q., Zhang, B., Chen, B. et al. (2014). Screening of biosurfactant producers from petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated sources in cold marine environments. Marine Pollution Bulletin 86 (1‐2): 402–410.
87 87 Cai, Q., Zhang, B., Chen, B. et al. (2015). Screening of biosurfactant‐producing bacteria from offshore oil and gas platforms in North Atlantic Canada. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 187 (5): 284.
88 88 Hamed, S.B., Smii, L., Ghram, A., and Maaroufi, A. (2012). Screening of potential biosurfactant‐producing bacteria isolated from seawater biofilm. African Journal of Biotechnology 11 (77): 14153–14158.
89 89 Banat, I., Thavasi, R., and Jayalakshmi, S. (2011). Biosurfactants from marine bacterial isolates. In: Current Research, Technology and Education Topics in Applied Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology (ed. A. Mendez‐Vilas), 1367–1373. Formatex Research Center.
90 90 Saimmai, A., Tani, A., Sobhon, V., and Maneerat, S. (2012). Mangrove sediment, a new source of potential biosurfactant‐producing bacteria. Annals of Microbiology 62 (4): 1669–1679.
91 91 Konishi, M., Maruoka, N., Furuta, Y. et al. (2014). Biosurfactant‐producing yeasts widely inhabit various vegetables and fruits. Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry 78 (3): 516–523.
92 92 Sena, H.H., Sanches, M.A., Rocha, D.F.S. et al. (2018). Production of biosurfactants by soil fungi isolated from the Amazon forest. International Journal of Microbiology 2018: 5684261.
93 93 Biniarz, P., Łukaszewicz, M., and Janek, T. (2017). Screening concepts, characterization and structural analysis of microbial‐derived bioactive lipopeptides: a review. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 37 (3): 393–410.
94 94 Mnif, I. and Ghribi, D. (2015). Microbial derived surface active compounds: properties and screening concept. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 31 (7): 1001–1020.
95 95 Koh, A., Wong, A., Quinteros, A. et al. (2017). Influence of sophorolipid structure on interfacial properties of aqueous‐arabian light crude and related constituent emulsions. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 94 (1): 107–119.
96 96 Jiménez‐Peñalver, P., Castillejos, M., Koh, A. et al. (2018). Production and characterization of sophorolipids from stearic acid by solid‐state fermentation, a cleaner alternative to chemical surfactants. Journal of Cleaner Production 172: 2735–2747.
97 97 Yeh, M.S., Wei, Y.H., and Chang, J.S. (2006). Bioreactor design for enhanced carrier‐assisted surfactin production with Bacillus subtilis. Process Biochemistry 41 (8): 1799–1805.
98 98 Vardar‐Sukan, F. (1998). Foaming: Consequences, prevention and destruction. Biotechnology Advances 16 (5): 913–948.
99 99 Saucedo‐Castañeda, G., Favela‐Torres, E., Viniegra‐González, G., Torres‐Mancera, M.T., Figueroa‐Montero, A., and Rosales Zamora, G. (2016). Sistema de respirometría con administración remota para el monitoreo en línea de la concentración de CO2 y O2 y flujo de los flujos de salida de procesos biológicos. Mexican patent 336733, Issued 22 January 2016.
100 100 Oliveira, M.R., Camilios‐Neto, D., Baldo, C. et al. (2014). Biosynthesis and production of sophorolipids. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research 3 (11): 133–146.
101 101 Daverey, A. and Pakshirajan, K. (2010). Sophorolipids from Candida bombicola using mixed hydrophilic substrates: production, purification and characterization. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (1): 246–253.
102 102 Marquardt, D.W. (1963). An algorithm for least‐squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 11 (2): 431–441.
103 103 Levenspiel, O. (1999). Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3e. New York: Wiley.
3 Microbial Gums: Current Trends and Applications
Rwivoo Baruah and Prakash M. Halami
Microbiology & Fermentation Technology Department, CSIR-Central Food Technological Research Institute, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
3.1 Introduction
Microbial gums are polysaccharides produced by various microbes like bacteria, fungi, and algae as a metabolite. These microbial gums protect their producers from harsh environmental conditions and sometimes act as secondary carbon sources. These gums have a unique property to form a gel when in contact with water. They are used in several industrial applications. Applications of microbial gums are seen in biotechnology, food, cosmetics, environmental and biomedical uses and, in recent times, have seen tremendous progress in this field of research, such as improving microbial gum behavior by chemical modifications or enhancing microbial gum production by bioprocess engineering techniques. Another reason for the increasing interest in microbial gums is due to the fact that they are biodegradable in nature as opposed to synthetic polymeric gums. Compared to plant‐based gums, microbial gums can be produced in large quantities in less time by controlled fermentation [1].
Microbial gums are complex polysaccharides composed of a chain of monosaccharide units joined by glycosidic linkages having high molecular weight. These gums can be classified on the basis of their monomer composition into (i) homopolysaccharides (HoPS) and (ii) heteropolysaccharides (HePS). HoPS are polysaccharides, which are composed of a single type of monomer units like dextran, levan, and pullulan. HePS are polysaccharides, which are composed of more than one type of monomer unit and sometimes composed of noncarbohydrate groups. Microbial gums can be produced as extracellular metabolites such as exopolysaccharide (EPS) or as endo‐polysaccharides [2].
A class of microbial gums originating from Sphingomonas spp., which includes gellan, welan, and diutan, are collectively called sphingans. They have a fairly similar structure but a few different properties [3]. These polysaccharides, even in small concentrations, can increase the viscosity in a solution. These properties are due to the unique composition, linkages among residues, and molecular weight found in different microbial gums from a wide range of bacteria, fungi, and algae [4].
The viscosifying effects of microbial gums, which are nontoxic in nature, have been especially exploited in the food industry as hydrocolloids, emulsifiers, and stabilizers.
This