Advertisement

Effect of nitrogen sources and neutralizing agents on D-lactic acid production from Kodo millet bran hydrolysate: comparative study and kinetic analysis

  • Rengesh Balakrishnan
  • Subbi Rami Reddy Tadi
  • Allampalli Satya Sai Pavan
  • Senthilkumar SivaprakasamEmail author
  • Shyamkumar RajaramEmail author
Original Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

D-lactic acid (DLA) serves as a key monomer enhancing both the mechanical and thermal properties of Poly(lactic) acid films and coatings, extensively used in the food packaging industry. Economically viable production of optically pure DLA by Lactobacillus delbrueckii NBRC3202 was achieved using a low–cost carbon source, Kodo millet bran residue hydrolysate (KMBRH) and nitrogen source (casein enzyme hydrolysate (CEH) resulting in a high DLA yield of 0.99 g g−1 and KMBRH conversion to final product (95.3%). The optimum values for kinetic parameters viz., specific growth rate (0.11 h−1), yield coefficient of biomass on KMBRH (0.10 g g−1) and DLA productivity (0.45 g L−1 h−1) were achieved at 5 g L−1 of CEH dosage under controlled pH environment. A comparative study and kinetic analysis of different neutralizing agents (NaOH, NH3, CaCO3 and NaHCO3) under pH controlled environment for KMBRH based DLA production was addressed effectively through bioreactor scale experiments. Maximum cell concentration (1.29 g L−1) and DLA titer (45.08 g L−1) were observed with NH3 as a neutralizing agent. Kinetic analysis of DLA production under different neutralization agents demonstrated that the logistic derived model predicted biomass growth, KMBRH consumption and DLA production efficiently (R2 > 0.92).

Keywords

D-(−)-lactic acid Millet bran Lactobacillus delbrueckii Kinetic modeling Bioreactor Neutralizing agent 

List of symbols

ASTM

American society for testing and materials

BE

Beaf extract

BHI

Brain heart infusion

CEH

Casein enzyme hydrolysate

DLA

D-(−)-lactic concentration (g L−1)

G

KMBRH concentration (g L−1)

G0

Initial KMBRH concentration (g L−1)

GAU

Glucoamylase units

KMBR

Kodo millet bran residue

KMBRH

Kodo millet bran residue hydrolysate

LLA

L-(+)-lactic acid

mG

Maintenance coefficient (g g−1 h−1)

MRS

deMan Rogosa Sharpe

MMRS

Modified MRS

PDLA

Poly D-(−)-lactic acid

PDLLA

Poly DL lactic acid

PLA

Poly lactic acid

PLLA

Poly L-(+)-lactic acid

R2

Correlation coefficient (dimensionless)

rDLA

Volumetric DLA production rate (g L−1 h−1)

rG

Volumetric KMBRH consumption rate (g L−1 h−1)

rX (vX)

Volumetric cell growth rate (g L−1 h−1)

SCADA

Supervisory control and data acquisition

SP

Soy peptone

t

Time (h)

WPH

Whey protein hydrolysate

X

Cell concentration (g L−1)

X0

Initial cell concentration (g L−1)

Xm

Maximum cell concentration at time (g.L−1)

YDLA/G

Product yield on substrate consumed (g g−1)

YE

Yeast extract

YX/G

Cell yield on KMBRH consumed (g g−1)

Greek symbols

αDLA

Luedeking–piret model growth associated constant for DLA (g g−1)

βDLA

Luedeking–piret model non-growth associated constant for DLA (g g−1 h−1)

μ

Specific growth rate (h−1)

Φ

Sum of squared errors (dimensionless)

λX

Delayed time variable (Lag-time) of L. delbrueckii (h)

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Mr.Sudhan, AR Radhakrishnan and Co, Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India for providing us millet bran samples for carrying out the project. Authors thank Department of Biotechnology, Kamaraj College of Engineering and Technology Management Board for their valuable support in successfully doing the project. Authors specially thank Department of Bioscience and Bioengineering and Department of Chemical Engineering, IIT Guwahati for providing us the lab facility for successful completion of this study. Authors also acknowledge the encouragement and support rendered by Mr.Srikanth, Mr.Naresh and Mr.Ganesh.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abdel-Rahman MA, Sonomoto K (2016) Opportunities to overcome the current limitations and challenges for efficient microbial production of optically pure lactic acid. J Biotechnol 236:176–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arasaratnam V, Senthuran A, Balasubramaniam K (1996) Supplementation of whey with glucose and different nitrogen sources for lactic acid production by Lactobacillus delbrueckii. Enzyme Microbial Technol 19:482–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balakrishnan R, Tadi SRR, Sivaprakasam S, Rajaram S (2018) Optimization of acid and enzymatic hydrolysis of Kodo millet (Paspalum scrobiculatum) bran residue to obtain fermentable sugars for the production of optically pure d (−) lactic acid. Ind Crops Prod 111:731–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charalampopoulos D, Vázquez JA, Pandiella SS (2009) Modelling and validation of Lactobacillus plantarum fermentations in cereal-based media with different sugar concentrations and buffering capacities. Biochem Eng J 44:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cingadi S, Srikanth K, Arun E, Sivaprakasam S (2015) Statistical optimization of cassava fibrous waste hydrolysis by response surface methodology and use of hydrolysate based media for the production of optically pure d-lactic acid. Biochem Eng J 102:82–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Henton DE, Gruber P, Lunt J, Randall J (2005) Polylactic acid technology. In: Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT (eds) Natural fibers, biopolymers, and biocomposites, vol 16. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 527–577Google Scholar
  7. Hofvendahl K, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000) Factors affecting the fermentative lactic acid production from renewable resources. Enzyme Microbial Technol 26:87–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hujanen M, Linko Y-Y (1996) Effect of temperature and various nitrogen sources on L (+)-lactic acid production by Lactobacillus casei. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 45:307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kedia G, Vázquez JA, Pandiella SS (2008) Evaluation of the fermentability of oat fractions obtained by debranning using lactic acid bacteria. J Appl Microbiol 105:1227–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Komesu A, Maciel MRW, Maciel Filho R (2017) Separation and purification technologies for lactic acid—a brief review. BioResources 12:6885–6901Google Scholar
  11. Kostov G, Angelov M, Denkova Z, Dobrev I, Goranov B (2011) Lactic acid production with Lactobacillus casei ssp. rhamnosus NBIMCC 1013: Modeling and optimization of the nutrient medium. Eng Life Sci 11:517–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu Y, Matuana LM (2019) Surface texture and barrier performance of poly (lactic acid)–cellulose nanocrystal extruded-cast films. J Appl Polym Sci 136:47594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu J et al (2017) Improving nitrogen source utilization from defatted soybean meal for nisin production by enhancing proteolytic function of Lactococcus lactis F44. Sci Rep 7:6189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nakano S, Ugwu CU, Tokiwa Y (2012) Efficient production of d-(−)-lactic acid from broken rice by Lactobacillus delbrueckii using Ca(OH)2 as a neutralizing agent. Biores Technol 104:791–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Narayanan N, Roychoudhury PK, Srivastava A (2004) L (+) lactic acid fermentation and its product polymerization. Electr J Biotechnol 7:167–178Google Scholar
  16. Oh H, Wee Y-J, Yun J-S, Ryu H-W (2003) Lactic acid production through cell-recycle repeated-batch bioreactor. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 107:603–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oh H, Wee Y-J, Yun J-S, Han SH, Jung S, Ryu H-W (2005) Lactic acid production from agricultural resources as cheap raw materials. Biores Technol 96:1492–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Okano K, Tanaka T, Ogino C, Fukuda H, Kondo A (2010) Biotechnological production of enantiomeric pure lactic acid from renewable resources: recent achievements, perspectives, and limits. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 85:413–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rohit SG, Jyoti PK, Subbi RRT, Naresh M, Senthilkumar S (2018) Kinetic modeling of hyaluronic acid production in palmyra palm (Borassus flabellifer) based medium by Streptococcus zooepidemicus MTCC 3523. Biochem Eng J 137:284–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tadi SRR, Evr A, Limaye AM, Sivaprakasam S (2017) Enhanced production of optically pure D (–) lactic acid from nutritionally rich Borassus flabellifer sugar and whey protein hydrolysate based–fermentation medium. Biotechnology and applied biochemistry 64(2):279–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tanaka T, Hoshina M, Tanabe S, Sakai K, Ohtsubo S, Taniguchi M (2006) Production of D-lactic acid from defatted rice bran by simultaneous saccharification and fermentation. Biores Technol 97:211–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tashiro Y, Kaneko W, Sun Y, Shibata K, Inokuma K, Zendo T, Sonomoto K (2011) Continuous d-lactic acid production by a novelthermotolerant Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. lactis QU 41. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 89:1741–1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Todorov S, Dicks L (2006) Effect of medium components on bacteriocin production by Lactobacillus plantarum strains ST23LD and ST341LD, isolated from spoiled olive brine. Microbiol Res 161:102–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vázquez JA, Murado MA (2008) Unstructured mathematical model for biomass, lactic acid and bacteriocin production by lactic acid bacteria in batch fermentation. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 83:91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang P et al (2013) Immobilization of Rhizopus oryzae in a modified polyvinyl alcohol gel for L (+)-lactic acid production. Ann Microbiol 63:957–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yen H-W, Chen T-J, Pan W-C, Wu H-J (2010) Effects of neutralizing agents on lactic acid production by Rhizopus oryzae using sweet potato starch. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 26:437–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhang Y, Kumar A, Hardwidge PR, Tanaka T, Kondo A, Vadlani PV (2016) D-lactic acid production from renewable lignocellulosic biomass via genetically modified Lactobacillus plantarum. Biotechnol Progress 32:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhao T, Liu D, Ren H, Shi X, Zhao N, Chen Y, Ying H (2014) D-Lactic acid production by Sporolactobacillus inulinus Y2-8 immobilized in fibrous bed bioreactor using corn flour hydrolyzate. J Microbiol Biotechnol 24:1664–1672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhou Y, Du J, Tsao G (2002) Comparison of fumaric acid production by Rhizopus oryzae using different neutralizing agents. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 25:179–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiotechnologyKamaraj College of Engineering and TechnologyK.Vellakulam, Madurai DistrictIndia
  2. 2.BioPAT Laboratory, Department of Biosciences and BioengineeringIndian Institute of Technology GuwahatiGuwahatiIndia

Personalised recommendations