Advertisement

Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 75–82 | Cite as

Factors affecting stability ofSclerotium rolfsii UV-8 mutant cellulase complex under saccharification conditions

  • Mukund V. Deshpande
Article

Abstract

Enzyme stability studies in case ofSclerotium rolfsii UV-8 mutant have been investigated under the conditions used for saccharification of cellulose (50°C, pH 4.5, 48 h). Avicelase (measure of exoenzymes) and xylanase were found to be less stable than CMCase (endoglucanase) and β-glucosidase. Merthiolate (and other Hg compounds) added as a biocide, inactivated avicelase and xylanase about 60-70%. Of the antibiotics tested, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, and streptomycin sulfate were found suitable as an additive in cellulose hydrolysis system. The optimum hydrolysis of alkali-treated (AT)-rice straw, ATbagasse, Solka Floc SW40, and Avicel P.H.101 was observed under shaking conditions at pH 4.5, 50°C in CO2 atmosphere. It is suggested, all the studied parameters could be used for the evaluation of mutant strains.

Keywords

Cellulase Straw Apply Biochemistry Bagasse Rice Straw 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sadana, J. C., Shewale, J. G., and Deshpande, M. V. (1980), inProc. II Symp. on Bioconversion and Biochemical Engineering, vol. 1, Ghosh, T. K., ed., I.I.T., New Delhi, India, pp. 455–484.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deshpande, M. V. and Eriksson, K. E. (1984),Enzyme Microb. Technol. 6, 338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parisi, F. (1989), inAdvances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechology, vol. 38, Fiechter, A. ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 53–87.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lachke, A. H., Srinivasan, M. C., Deshmukh, S. S., and Deshpande, M. V. (1987),Biotechnol. Lett. 9, 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lynd, L. R. (1989), inAdvances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, vol. 38, Fiechter, A. ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 1–52.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lachke, A. H. and Deshpande, M. V. (1988),FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 54, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sadana, J. C., Shewale, J. G., and Deshpande, M. V. (1979),Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38, 730.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shewale, J. G. and Sadana, J. C. (1979), Can. J. Microbiol. 25, 773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wood, T. M. and Bhat, K. M. (1988), inMethods in Enzymology, vol. 160, Wood, W. A. and Kellogg, S. T., eds.,Academic, New York, pp. 87–112.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller, G. L. (1959),Anal. Chem. 31, 426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Report number 1760302 Ethanol AL. Swedish Board for Energy Conservation, 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reese, E. T. and Mandels, M. (1980),Biotechnol. Bioeng. XXII, 323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mozhaev, V. V. and Martinek, K. (1984),Enzyme Microb. Technol. 6, 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sinitsyn, A. P., Mitkevich, O. V., and Klesov, A. A. (1986),Prikl. Biochim. Mikrobiol. 22, 759.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eriksson, K. E., Pettersson, B., and Westermark, U. (1970),FEBS Lett. 49, 282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mukund V. Deshpande
    • 1
  1. 1.Biochemical Sciences DivisionNational Chemical LaboratoryPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations