Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering

, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp 1177–1183 | Cite as

New lipopeptide produced by Corynebacterium aquaticum from a low-cost substrate

  • Paola Chaves Martins
  • Cibele Garcia Bastos
  • Paulo Afonso Granjeiro
  • Vilásia Guimarães MartinsEmail author
Research Paper


Conventional biosurfactants have high production costs. Therefore, the use of low-cost carbon sources for their production is attractive for industry. The ability to remain stable under various environmental conditions further extends industrial application. Here we aimed to evaluate the stability of a new lipopeptide produced by Corynebacterium aquaticum using fish residue as an unconventional energy source. The biosurfactant was produced using 3% fish residue, 2% of the microorganism, and mineral medium. Biosurfactant characterization was performed by thin layer chromatography (TLC), as well as by testing its infrared, surface tension, emulsifying activity, and ionic character. The stability of the biosurfactant was evaluated by testing its surface tension at a range of temperatures, pH, and saline concentrations, as well as after 6 months of storage. The biosurfactant was characterized as a lipopeptide due to its retention time, which was coincident with the amino acid and lipid chains obtained in the TLC analysis, being confirmed by some regions of absorption verified in the infrared analysis. The surface tension and emulsifying activity of the biosurfactant were 27.8 mN/m and 87.6%, respectively, and showed anionic character. The biosurfactant was stable at temperatures of 20 to 121 °C, in saline concentrations of 1 to 7%, and at pH close to neutrality. Based on our findings, it is possible to use unconventional sources of energy to produce a lipopeptide biosurfactant that can act under various environments.


Biosurfactant Salt concentration Surface tension Storage 



The authors thank CAPES and CNPq for their financial support.


  1. 1.
    Cameotra SS, Makkar RS, Kaur J, Mehta SK (2010) Synthesis of biosurfactants and their advantages to microorganisms and mankind. Adv Exp Med Bio 672:261–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    França ÍWL, Lima AP, Lemos JAM, Lemos CGF, Melo VMM, Sant’ana HB, Gonçalves LRB (2015) Production of a biosurfactant by Bacillus subtilis ICA56 aiming bioremediation of impacted soils. Catal Today 255:10–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Desai JD, Banat IM (1997) Microbial production of surfactants and their commercial potential. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 61:47–64PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Slivinski CT, Mallmann E, Araújo JM, Mitchell DA, Krieger N (2012) Production of surfactin by Bacillus pumilus UFPEDA 448 in solid-state fermentation using a medium based on okara with sugarcane bagasse as a bulking agent. Process Biochem 47:1848–1855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Khan AW, Rahman MS, Zohora US, Okanami M, Ano T (2011) Production of surfactin using pentose carbohydrate by Bacillus subtilis. J Environ Sci 23:S63–S65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Silva SNRL., Farias CBB, Rufino RD, Luna JM, Sarubbo LA (2010) Glycerol as substrate for the production of biosurfactant by Pseudomonas aeruginosa UCP0992. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces 79:174–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luna JM, Rufino RD, Sarubbo LA, Campos-Takaki GM (2013) Characterization, surface properties and biological activity of a biosurfactant produced from industrial waste by Candida sphaerica UCP0995 for application in the petroleum industry. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces 102:202–209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Al-Bahry SN, Al-Wahaibi YM, Elshafie AE, Al-Bemani AS, Joshi SJ, Al-Makhmari HS, Al-Sulaimani HS (2013) Biosurfactant production by Bacillus subtilis B20 using date molasses and its possible application in enhanced oil recovery. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 81:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vilela WFD, Fonseca SG, Fantinatti-Garboggini F, Oliveira VM, Nitschke M (2014) Production and properties of a surface-active lipopeptide Produced by a new marine Brevibacterium luteolum strain. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 174:2245–2256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yeh MS, Wei YH, Chang JS (2005) Enhanced production of surfactin from Bacillus subtilis by addition of solid carriers. Biotechnol Prog 21:1329–1334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Makkar RS, Cameotra SS (1998) Production of biosurfactant at mesophilic and thermophilic conditions by a strain of Bacillus subtilis. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 20:48–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Broderick LS, Cooney JJ (1982) Emulsification of hydrocarbons by bacteria from fresh water ecosystems. Dev Ind Microbiol 23:425–434Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang J, Xue Q, Gao H, Lai H, Wang P (2016) Production of lipopeptide biosurfactants by Bacillus atrophaeus 5-2a and their potential use in microbial enhanced oil recovery. Microb Cell Fact 15:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thaniyavarn J, Chianguthai T, Sangvanich P, Roongsawang N, Washio K, Morikawa M, Thaniyavarn S (2008) Production of sophorolipid biosurfactant by Pichia anomala. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 72:2061–2068CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smyth TJP, Perfumo A, McClean S, Marchant R, Banat IM (2012) Isolation and analysis of lipopeptides and high molecular weight biosurfactants. Northern Ireland, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meylheuc T, Van Oss CJ, Bellon-Fontaine MN (2001) Adsorption of biosurfactant on solid surfaces and consequences regarding the bioadhesion of Listeria monocytogenes LO28. J Appl Microbiol 91:822–832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu GY, Sinclair JB, Hartman GL, Bertagnolli BL (2002) Production of iturin A by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens suppressing Rhizoctonia solani. Soil Biol Biochem 34:955–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sriram MI, Kalishwaralal K, Deepak V, Gracerosepat R, Srisakthi K, Gurunathan S (2011) Biofilm inhibition and antimicrobial action of lipopeptide biosurfactant produced by heavy metal tolerant strain Bacillus cereus NK1. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces 85:174–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fernandes PAV, Arruda IR, Santos AFAB., Araújo AA, Maior AMS, Ximenes EA (2007) Antimicrobial activity of surfactants produced by Bacillus subtilis R14 against multidrug-resistant bacteria. Brazilian J Microbiol 38:704–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dusane DH, Pawar VS, Nancharaiah YV, Venugopalan VP, Kumar AR, Zinjarde SS (2011) Anti-biofilm potential of a glycolipid surfactant produced by a tropical marine strain of Serratia marcescens. Biofouling 27:645–654CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bezza FA, Chirwa EMN (2015) Biosurfactant from Paenibacillus dendritiformis and its application in assisting polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and motor oil sludge removal from contaminated soil and sand media. Process Saf Environ Prot 98:354–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Batista SB, Mounteer AH, Amorim FR, Tótola MR (2006) Isolation and characterization of biosurfactant/bioemulsifier-producing bacteria from petroleum contaminated sites. Bioresour Technol 97:868–875CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rufino RD, Luna JM, Campos-Takaki GM, Sarubbo LA (2014) Characterization and properties of the biosurfactant produced by Candida lipolytica UCP 0988. Electron J Biotechno 17:34–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Inès M, Dhouha G (2015) Lipopeptide surfactants: production, recovery and pore forming capacity. Peptides 71:100–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vaz DA, Gudiña EJ, Alameda EJ, Teixeira JA, Rodrigues LR (2012) Performance of a biosurfactant produced by a Bacillus subtilis strain isolated from crude oil samples as compared to commercial chemical surfactants. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces 89:167–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jain RM, Mody K, Joshi N, Mishra A, Jha B (2013) Effect of unconventional carbon sources on biosurfactant production and its application in bioremediation. Int J Biol Macromol 62:52–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barros FFC, Quadros CP, Maróstica MR, Pastore GM (2007) Surfactin: chemical, technological and functional properties for food applications. Quim Nova 30:409–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Food Technology, School of Chemistry and FoodFederal University of Rio Grande (FURG)Rio Grande do SulBrazil
  2. 2.Laboratory of Biotechnology Process and Purification of MacromoleculesFederal University of São João Del-Rey, Campus Centro OesteDivinópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations