纤维素降解产物对Kluyveromyces marxianus 1727共发酵葡萄糖和木糖的影响

研究纤维素酸水解产生的4种副产物乙酸、甲酸、糠醛、5-羟甲基糠醛及发酵产物乙醇对Kluyveromyces marxianus 1727共发酵葡萄糖和木糖的影响。结果表明:5.0 g/L乙酸和1.0 g/L甲酸对葡萄糖和木糖共发酵具有明显的抑制作用;1.0 g/L糠醛和5-羟甲基糠醛基本不影响K.marxianus 1727发酵葡萄糖,且能够被K.marxianus1727转化为毒性相对较低的物质。由于5-羟甲基糠醛的转化速率慢,对K.marxianus 1727发酵木糖的抑制程度大于糠醛。乙醇对K.marxianus 1727发酵木糖具有抑制作用,当乙醇质量浓度大于20 g/L时,生物量及木糖利用率约是对照的44%和70%。     

Lactic acid production by mixed cultures of Kluyveromyces marxianus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp. bulgaricus and Lactobacillus helveticus

Lactic acid production using Kluyveromyces marxianus (IFO 288), Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp. bulgaricus (ATCC 11842) and Lactobacillus helveticus (ATCC 15009) individually or as mixed culture on cheese whey in stirred or static fermentation conditions was evaluated. Lactic acid production, residual sugar and cell biomass were the main features examined. Increased lactic acid production was observed, when mixed cultures were used in comparison to individual ones. The highest lactic acid concentrations were achieved when K. marxianus yeast was combined with L. delbrueckii ssp. bulgaricus, and when all the strains were used revealing possible synergistic effects between the yeast and the two lactic acid bacteria. The same synergistic effects were further observed and verified when the mixed cultures were applied in sourdough fermentations, proving that the above microbiological system could be applied in the food fermentations where high lactic acid production is sought.     

Identification of white-rot and soft-rot fungi increasing ethanol production from spent sulfite liquor in co-culture with Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Aim:  To identify fungi that are capable of increasing ethanol production from lignocellulose in spent sulfite liquor.
Methods and Results:  In a batch fermentation study, the fungal mix could produce 24·61 g l⁻¹ ethanol using spent sulfite liquor as substrate. The fungal mix grew well on glucose, xylose, hemicellulose and cellulose. In addition, we were able to identify the fungal mix by use of PCR-amplification of DNA and sequencing, and they were identified as Chalara parvispora and Trametes hirsuta/T. versicolor. In a reconstitution study, the identified fungi were shown to produce equal amount of ethanol as the fungal mix. We were also able to show that C. parvispora could produce ethanol from xylose.
Conclusion:  The present study has shown that ethanol production from biomass can be increased by use of C. parvispora and T. versicolor when compared with fermentation using only S. cerevisiae .
Significance and Impact of the Study:  The study shows that refining biomass by ethanol production from spent sulfite liquor, a lignocellulose material, can be increased by adding C. parvispora and T. versicolor , and it is thus of great potential economical impact.     

Intergeneric yeast fusants with efficient ethanol production from cheese whey powder solution: Construction of a Kluyveromyces marxianus and Saccharomyces cerevisiae AY‐5 hybrid

Due to its high content of lactose and abundant availability, cheese whey powder (CWP) has received much attention for ethanol production in fermentation processes. However, lactose‐fermenting yeast strains including Kluyveromyces marxianus can only produce alcohol at a relatively low level, while the most commonly used distiller yeast strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae cannot ferment lactose since it lacks both β‐galactosidase and the lactose permease system. To combine the unique aspects of these two yeast strains, hybrids of K. marxianus TY‐22 and S. cerevisiae AY‐5 were constructed by protoplast fusion. The fusants were screened and characterized by DNA content, β‐galactosidase activity, ethanol tolerance, and ethanol productivity. Among the genetically stable fusants, the DNA content of strain R‐1 was 6.94%, close to the sum of the DNA contents of TY‐22 (3.99%) and AY‐5 (3.51%). The results obtained by random‐amplified polymorphic DNA analysis suggested that R‐1 was a fusant between AY‐5 and TY‐22. During the fermentation process with CWP, the hybrid strain R‐1 produced 3.8% v/v ethanol in 72 h, while the parental strain TY‐22 only produced 3.1% v/v ethanol in 84 h under the same conditions.