Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering

, Volume 41, Issue 6, pp 819–829 | Cite as

Influence of the flow field on α-cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase production by Escherichia coli BL21

  • Xiao Li
  • Chao-Qun Xu
  • Yu-Di Luo
  • Song Zhang
  • Cong Huang
  • Kun Zou
  • Ya-Li Tan
  • Ye-Xu Wu
  • Zhang-Shuang Deng
Research Paper

Abstract

The computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software package Fluent was utilized to simulate the flow field of Escherichia coli (E. coli) BL21 fermentation in a 50 L automatic bioreactor for producing α-cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase (α-CGTase) in this study. 4-down-pumping propeller (4DPP), 6-curved-blade disc turbine (6CBDT), and Rushton turbine (RT) were assembled to form eight impeller combinations (C1–C8). Through flow field simulating, four referential impeller combinations, in which C6, C7, and C8 were three layers stirring blades and C1 as a control, were selected to carry out batch fermentation experiments (TC1, TC6, TC7, and TC8) for validation. The correlation analysis between simulation results and experimental measurements indicated that TC6 (tank equipped with C6 impeller combination) exhibited lower enzymatic activity though it had the better mixing effect, fastest oxygen uptake rate (OUR), and maximum specific growth rate (µ) in the initial stage, which was just to the contrary in TC8. It was revealed by next fed-batch fermentation experiments in TC6 and TC8 that TC6 was considered as excellent flow field properties brought about the higher µ of E. coli BL21 and fast acetic acid (HAc) accumulation, which resulting in a serious inhibition on α-CGTase expression and this negative effect could not be removed. As a result, there should be a threshold of HAc accumulation rate which brought about a terrible inhibitory effect on α-CGTase expression. Moreover, the yield of α-CGTase activity reached 231.38 U mL− 1 in TC8, which elevated 31.74% compared to that obtained in TC1.

Keywords

α-Cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase Computational fluid dynamics Flow field simulation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Natural Science Foundation of Hubei province (No. 2015CFA150), and thanks the research team for their sincere cooperation and selfless dedication.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Tonkova A (1998) Bacterial cyclodextrin glucanotransferase. Enzyme Microb Technol 22(8):678–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li Z, Wang M, Wang F, Gu Z, Du G, Wu J, Chen J (2007) γ-Cyclodextrin: a review on enzymatic production and applications. Appl Microb Biotechnol 77(2):245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Macaev F, Boldescu V (2015) Cyclodextrins in asymmetric and stereospecific synthesis. Symmetry 7(4):1699–1720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bautista V, Esclapez J, Pérezpomares F, Martínezespinosa RM, Camacho M, Bonete MJ (2012) Cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase: a key enzyme in the assimilation of starch by the halophilic archaeon Haloferax mediterranei. Extremophiles 16(1):147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mahat MK, Illias RM, Rahman RA, Rashid NAA, Mahmood NAN, Hassan O, Aziz SA, Kamaruddin K (2004) Production of cyclodextrin glucanotransferase (CGTase) from alkalophilic Bacillus sp. TS1-1: media optimization using experimental design. Enzyme Microb Technol 35(5):467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rosso AM, Ferrarotti SA, Krymkiewicz N, Nudel BC (2002) Optimisation of batch culture conditions for cyclodextrin glucanotransferase production from Bacillus circulans DF 9R. Microb Cell Fact 1(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim MH, Lee JK, Kim HK, Sohn CB, Oh TK (1999) Overexpression of cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase gene from Brevibacillus brevis in Escherichia coli by control of temperature and mannitol concentration. Biotechnol Tech 13(11):765–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kriaa M, Ayadi DZ, Jemli S, Sahnoun M, Bejar S, Kammoun R (2012) Improvement of cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase (CGTase) production by recombinant Escherichia coli pAD26 immobilized on the cotton. Biologia 67(6):1049–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ramli N, Abd-Aziz S, Alitheen NB, Hassan MA, Maeda T (2013) Improvement of cyclodextrin glycosyltransferase gene expression in Escherichia coli by insertion of regulatory sequences involved in the promotion of RNA transcription. Mol Biotechnol 54(3):961–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahmed SU, Ranganathan P, Pandey A (2010) Computational fluid dynamics modeling of gas dispersion in multi impeller bioreactor. J Biosci Bioeng 109(6):588–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kerdouss F, Bannari A, Proulx P, Bannari R, Skrga M, Labrecque Y (2008) Two-phase mass transfer coefficient prediction in stirred vessel with a CFD model. Comput Chem Eng 32(8):1943–1955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garcia-Ochoa F, Gomez E (2009) Bioreactor scale-up and oxygen transfer rate in microbial processes: an overview. Biotechnol Adv 27(2):153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Enfors SO, Jahic M, Rozkov A, Xu B, Hecker M, Jürgen B, Krüger E, Schweder T, Hamer G, O’Beirne D (2001) Physiological responses to mixing in large scale bioreactors. J Biotechnol 85(2):175–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu XL (2014) Analysis of acetic acid metabolism from recombinant E. coli his 3.1. Value Eng 12:294–297Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suárez DC, Kilikian BV (2000) Acetic acid accumulation in aerobic growth of recombinant Escherichia coli. Process Biochem 35(9):1051–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shi D, Zhang Q, Wen J, Song X, Hong H (2013) CFD simulation of gas-inducing reactor and its application in yeast production. J Nanjing Univ Technol (Natural Sci Ed) 35(4):72–77Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Um BH, Hanley TR (2008) A CFD model for predicting the flow patterns of viscous fluids in a bioreactor under various operating conditions. Korean J Chem Eng 25(5):1094–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li X, Zhang J, Tan YL, Li ZH, Yu XF, Xia JY, Chu J, Ge YQ (2013) Effects of flow field on the metabolic characteristics of Streptomyces lincolnensis in the industrial fermentation of lincomycin. J Biosci Bioeng 115(1):27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Duan S, Yuan G, Zhao Y, Ni W, Luo H, Shi Z, Liu F (2013) Simulation of computational fluid dynamics and comparison of cephalosporin C fermentation performance with different impeller combinations. Korean J Chem Eng 30(5):1097–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Korte G, Rinas U, Kracke-Helm HA, Schügerl K (1991) Simulation of cell growth, substrate consumption and product formation with recombinant Escherichia coli. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 35(2):189–199Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nishio Y, Ogishima S, Ichikawa M, Yamada Y, Usuda Y, Masuda T, Tanaka H (2013) Analysis of l-glutamic acid fermentation by using a dynamic metabolic simulation model of Escherichia coli. BMC Syst Biol 7(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Konstantinov K, Kishimoto M, Seki T, Yoshida T (1990) A balanced DO-stat and its application to the control of acetic acid excretion by recombinant Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Bioeng 36(7):750–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhu J (1981) Biochemistry experiment. Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publishers, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lejeune A, Sakaguchi K, Imanaka T (1989) A spectrophotometric assay for the cyclization activity of cyclomaltohexaose (α-cyclodextrin) glucanotransferase. Anal Biochem 181(1):6–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim JH, Lim JS, Kim CH, Kim SW (2005) Morphology and kinetics studies on cephalosporin C production by Cephalosporium acremonium M25 in a 30-l bioreactor using a mixture of inocula. Lett Appl Microbiol 40(5):307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sommerfeld M, Decker S (2004) State of the art and future trends in CFD simulation of stirred vessel hydrodynamics. Chem Eng Technol 27(3):215–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Monod J (1978) The growth of bacterial cultures. Selected Papers Mol Biol Jacques Monod 3(6):139–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sandén AM, Prytz I, Tubulekas I, Förberg C, Le H, Hektor A, Neubauer P, Pragai Z, Harwood C, Ward A (2003) Limiting factors in Escherichia coli fed-batch production of recombinant proteins. Biotechnol Bioeng 81(2):158–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Xia JY, Wang YH, Zhang SL, Chen N, Yin P, Zhuang YP, Chu J (2009) Fluid dynamics investigation of variant impeller combinations by simulation and fermentation experiment. Biochem Eng J 43(3):252–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Montante G, Magelli F (2004) Liquid Homogenization characteristics in vessels stirred with multiple rushton turbines mounted at different spacings: CFD Study and comparison with experimental data. Chem Eng Res Design 82(9):1179–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bandaiphet C, Prasertsan P (2006) Effect of aeration and agitation rates and scale-up on oxygen transfer coefficient, k(L)a in exopolysaccharide production from Enterobacter cloacae WD7. Carbohyd Polym 66(2):216–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Çalık P, Çalık G, Özdamar TH (2000) Oxygen-transfer strategy and its regulation effects in serine alkaline protease production by Bacillus licheniformis. Biotechnol Bioeng 69(3):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Haq IU, Ali S, Qadeer MA (2005) Influence of dissolved oxygen concentration on intracellular pH for regulation of Aspergillus niger growth rate during citric acid fermentation in a stirred tank bioreactor. Int J Biol Sci 1(1):34–41Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jahoda M, Tomášková L, Moštěk M (2009) CFD prediction of liquid homogenisation in a gas–liquid stirred tank. Chem Eng Res Design 87(4):460–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiao Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chao-Qun Xu
    • 1
  • Yu-Di Luo
    • 2
  • Song Zhang
    • 2
  • Cong Huang
    • 1
  • Kun Zou
    • 1
  • Ya-Li Tan
    • 2
  • Ye-Xu Wu
    • 2
  • Zhang-Shuang Deng
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Biological and Pharmaceutical EngineeringChina Three Gorges UniversityYichangPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Angel Yeast Co., Ltd.YichangPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations