alexa Statistical Optimization of Culture Conditions for L-Methionine Production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 | OMICS International
2376-130X
Journal of Theoretical & Computational Science

Like us on:

Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

Statistical Optimization of Culture Conditions for L-Methionine Production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300

Subhadeep Ganguly and Kunja Bihari Satapathy*

Department of Botany, Utkal University, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

*Corresponding Author:
Kunja Bihari Satapathy
Department of Botany, Utkal University
Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751 004, Odisha, India
Tel: +916742567940
E-mail: [email protected]

Received date: December 26, 2016; Accepted date: January 09, 2017; Published date: January 16, 2017

Citation: Ganguly S, Satapathy KB (2017) Statistical Optimization of Culture Conditions for L-Methionine Production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300. J Theor Comput Sci 4:150. doi:10.4172/2376-130X.1000150

Copyright: © 2017 Ganguly S, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Theoretical & Computational Science

Abstract

Statistical optimization was done for L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 using Response Surface Methodology emphasizing Central Composite Design with different variables. Maximum production of L-methionine (52.1 mg/ml) was obtained with 72 h of incubation.

Keywords

Statistical; Optimization; L-methionine; Response surface methodology; Central composite design

Introduction

Statistical methods are widely used for fermentation optimization, because they reduce the total number of experiments required and provide a good understanding of the interactions among different factors on the outcome of the fermentation [1]. Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is a group of mathematical and statistical techniques for the optimization of multiple variables and levels in a minimum acceptable number of experimental trials [2]. Taguchi’s method has gained worldwide acceptance in the optimization of fermentation processes [1].

Adinarayana and Ellaiah used RSM for the optimization of the medium components for the production of alkaline protease by a Bacillus sp [3]. Balusu et al. used RSM for the optimization of medium components for ethanol production from cellulosic biomass by Clostridium thermocellum SS19 [4]. Shih and Shen applied RSM to optimize the production of poly €-lysine by Streptomyces albulus IFO 14147 [5]. Nelofer et al. optimized the process variables for L-lysine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum K [6]. Pandey and Banik optimized different physical parameters for alkaline phosphate production by Bacillus licheniformis using RSM [7].

RSM is advantageous over conventional methods as it requires less number of experiments and its suitability for multiple variable experiments and search for common relationship between different variables towards finding the most suitable conditions for the production of the desired metabolites [8-12]. This methodology could employ to optimize different physic-chemical conditions for L-methionine production.

Thus, the aim of this present investigation was to optimize different production conditions of L-methionine by the mutant Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 controlling different physical and nutritional parameters using RSM.

Materials and Methods

Microorganism

Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 developed by induced mutantion and protoplast fusion was used throughout the study [13].

Composition of growth medium

Glucose, 20 g; (NH4)2SO4; 1.6 g; NaCl, 2.5 g; MgSO4.7H2O, 0.25 g; MnSO4.4H2O, 0.1 g; K2HPO4, 1 g; KH2PO4, 1 g; H2O, 1 L and agar, 2% as a solidifying agent [14].

Growth conditions

The fermentation was carried out using medium volume, 30 ml; initial pH 7; shaker speed, 200 rpm; the age of inoculum, 48 h; cell density, 3 × 108 cells/ml and temperature, 30°C [14].

Composition of basal salt medium for L-methionine production

L methionine production was initially carried out (before optimization) using the following basal salt medium: glucose, 60 g; (NH4)2SO4, 1.5 g; K2HPO4, 1.4 g; MgSO4·7H2O, 0.9 g; FeSO4·7H2O, 0.01 g; biotin, 60 μg and H2O, 1 L [14].

Analysis of L-methionine

Descending paper chromatography was employed for detecting L-methionine in the broth and was run for 18h on Whatman No.1 chromatography paper. Solvent system contained: n-butanol: acetic acid: water (2:1:1). The spot was visualized by spraying a solution of 0.2% ninhydrin in acetone and quantitative estimation of L-methionine in the suspension was done using a colorimetric method [14].

Confirmatory test for L-methionine

Quantitative determination of L-methionine in the fermentation medium without purification was done following the method as described by Greenstein and Wintz. 1 ml of 5(N) NaOH, and 0.1 ml of 10% sodium nitroprosside solution, was added to 5 ml supernatant after centrifugation at 5000 rpm for 15 min. The tube was thoroughly shaken and the mixture was allowed to stand for 10 min. 25 ml of 3% aqueous solution of glycerine was added to the reaction mixture with frequent shaking over a period of 10 min. After additional 10 min interval, 2 ml of concentrated orthophosphoric acid was added drop wise to the mixture and the test tube was properly shaken. Colour development was allowed to produce for 5 min and colour intensity was measured at 540 nm in spectrophotometer (Perkin Elmer Lambda 68 UV VIS). The L-methionine yield was extrapolated from a standard L-methionine curve [15].

Recovery of L-methionine from fermented broth

An inexpensive down-stream recovery process that is capable of achieving the requisite recovery yield and purity is essential for producing any metabolite. Various levels of down-stream processing are required for the existing amino acid fermentation. The general approach to designing an efficient recovery scheme for bio products has been elucidated by Chisti and Moo-Young. The production scheme must accommodate the various regulatory requirements and consider the end use application of the product. Purification of L-amino acids relies on their physico-chemical properties, particularly solubility and isoelectric point. As the first step of the down-stream recovery process, the cells are separated from the fermentation broth by either centrifugation or filtration. The cell-free broth is then passed through activated charcoal columns for decolorization. L-methionine (isoelectric pH 5.74) can be recovered from the clarified broth by adjusting the pH to 5 with sulfuric acid to convert the amino acid to its cationic form and passing the broth though a bed of Amberlite IR-120 (H+) ion exchange resin at a controlled flow rate. The process is repeated until all the L-methionine is adsorbed. Afterwards, the column is washed with deionized water and eluted with 1(M) NH4OH to recover the L-methionine. Crystalline L-methionine can be obtained by concentrating under vacuum, treating with absolute alcohol, and drying overnight at 80°C [16-18].

Estimation of Dry Cell Weight (DCW)

The cell paste was obtained from the fermentation broth by centrifugation and dried at 1000C until constant cell weight was obtained [17-19].

Estimation of residual sugar: Residual sugar was determined by the DNS method as proposed by Miller [14].

Statistical analysis: All data were expressed as mean±SEM, where n=6, where ‘n’ denotes the number of experimental set up. Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA using a software Prism 4.0, considering p<0.05 as significant and p<0.01 as highly significant.

Response surface methodology: It consists of a group of experimental technologies, used for evaluation of relationship between different variables and measured responses. Plackett-Burmann design was used to assess the pick variables that influence L-methionine fermentation by the mutant significantly and insignificant factors were eliminated in order to obtain a smaller manageable set of variables. RSM was applied in two stages, first to trace out the significant variables for the production using Plackett-Burmann design criterion and later significant variables related from Plackett-Burmann design were optimized by a central composite design. The experimental design and statistical analysis of the data were done by using a software, prism 4.0.

Plackett-Burmann Design (PBD): Each variable was examined at two levels, namely a high level (+1) and low level (-1). Initial pH, volume of medium, age of inoculum, shaker’s speed, temperature, cell density, period of incubation, carbon source, nitrogen source, K2HPO4, KH2PO4, CaCO3, MgSO4.7H2O, NaCl, KCl, ZnSO4.7H2O, Na2MoO4.2H2O, MnSO4.4H2O, FeSO4.7H2O, biotin and thiamine-HCl were screened by conducting six experiments using Plackett-Burmann design. All experiments were conducted in six sets and mean values of L-methionine production was used for statistical analysis. The variables, which were significant at 1% level (p<0.01) from one way ANOVA were considered to have high impact on L-methionine production and were further optimized using Central Composite Design.

Central Composite Design (CCD): It was applied to determine the optimum levels of seven significant production parameters determined from PBD. The effects of the parameters (namely: age of inoculums, shaker’s speed, temperature, cell density, glucose concentration, nitrogen concentration, K2HPO4, KH2PO4, CaCO3, MgSO4.7H2O, FeSO4.7H2O and biotin) on L-methionine production by the mutant were examined at levels: -2, -1, 0, +1 and +2 where α+ 2n/4, where ‘α+’ represents the number of levels of significance considered (i.e., 5). Hence ‘n’ was the number of variables and ‘0’ corresponded to the central point. The level of each variable was determined by the following equation [20]:

image (1)

The experimental plan and the following independent variable were obtained from CCD: volume of medium, (15-35 ml), initial pH (6-8), age of inoculum (24-84), cell density (1 × 108-6 × 108 cells), temperature (25-32°C), period of incubation (24-108 h), carbon sources (glucose, fructose, sucrose, lactose, maltose, ribose, xylose, starch, dextrin, sodium citraite, sodium acetate and glycerol), different concentrations of glucose (20-140 g/L), nitrogen sources (urea, ammonium sulphate, sodium nitrate, ammonium chloride, ammonium nitrate, diammonium hydrogen phosphate, ammonium dihydrogen phosphate, ammonium carbonate, ammonium oxalate and ammonium citrate) and different concentrations of nitrogen (1-10 g/L) in the form of ammonium sulphate

After identification of significant variables using Plackett-Burmann design, Box-Wilson 24 factorial CCD was applied to optimize these variables. Five levels of variables were coded as [6]:

image (2)

[Where, Z=Code value; X=Natural value; X’=Natural value in central domain; ȡx=increment of X corresponding to one unit of Z]. A total number of 31 experiments with 8 axial points (α=2) and six replications was applied for Box-Wilson 24 factorial CCD. The general form of the second degree polynomial equation was applied in this present study. The equation can be presented as follows [7]:

image (3)

Where, Y=Response variable; βo=Coefficient of interaction effect (offset term); βi=Linear coefficient (ith term); βii=Coefficient of quadratic effect (iith term); βij=Interaction coefficient (ijth term). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression analysis was done using software Prism 4.0.

Results

Screening of variables by Plackett-Burmann design criterion for L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300

The variables which significantly affect the production of L-methionine by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 were determined by Plackett-Burmann design. All the twenty one parameters such as volume of medium, initial pH, age of inoculums, shaker’s speed, temperature, cell density, period of incubation, glucose concentration, nitrogen concentration (in term of ammonium sulphate), KH2PO4, KH2PO4, CaCO3, MgSO4.7H2O, NaCl, KCl, FeSO4.7H2O, ZnSO4.7H2O, Na2MoO4.2H2O, MnSO4.4H2O, biotin and thiamine-HCl were examined at two widely spaced levels (Table 1).

Code Parameter High level (+1) Low level(-1)
Level Activity (mg/ml) Level Activity(mg/ml)
I Volume of medium (ml) 35 8.8 ± 0.691 15 7.8 ± 0.881
II Initial pH 8 7.9 ± 0.591 6 8.3 ± 0.779
III Shaker’s speed(rpm) 300 8.6 ± 0.881 100 10.8 ± 0.728
IV Age of inoculum (h) 84 4.8 ± 0.689 24 9.6 ± 0.913
V Cell density (cells) 6×108 11.1 ± 0.881 1×108 6.3 ± 0.812
VI Temperature (°C) 32 9.1 ± 0.681 25 4.8 ± 0.791
VII Period of incubation(h) 108 8.6 ± 0.883 24 1.8 ± 0.681
VIII Glucose concentration (g/L) 104 17.6 ± 0.992 20 9.6 ± 0.681
IX Nitrogen content (g/L) 10 22.9 ± 1.181 1 16.1 ± 0.613
X K2HPO4(g/L) 2.4 26.8 ± 1.631 1 23.9 ± 1.668
XI KH2PO4(g/L) 2.1 33.8 ± 0.691 0 25.6 ± 0.916
XII CaCO3(g/L) 3 37.3 ± 0.619 0 34.3 ± 0.793
XIII MgSO4.7H2O(g/L) 1.8 28.1 ± 1.613 0.3 25.8 ± 0.874
XIV NaCl (g/L) 2.4 42.8 ± 0.689 1 42.8 ± 0.613
XV KCl(g/L) 2.4 40.8 ± 0.871 1 42.8 ± 0.932
XVI FeSO4.7H2O (mg/L) 35 29.9 ± 0.993 5 26.6 ± 1.913
XVII ZnSO4.7H2O (mg/L) 1.7 43.1 ± 0.793 0 40.2 ± 0.661
XVIII Na2MoO4.2H2O (mg/L) 8 45.8 ± 0.881 0 44.2 ± 0.692
XIX MnSO4.4H2O (mg/L) 6 46.7 ± 0.882 0 46.9 ± 0.692
XX Biotin (μg/ml) 100 50.1 ± 0.832 0 48.1 ± 0.661
XXI Thiamine-HCl (μg/ml) 100 51.2 ± 0.661 0 50.8 ± 0.913

Table 1: Level of variables examined for L-methionine production by the mutant Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 using Plackett-Burmann design criterion.

Among the twenty-one variables examined, shaker’s speed (III), age of inoculum (IV), cell density (V), temperature (VI), glucose concentration (VIII), nitrogen concentration (IX), KH2PO4 (X), KH2PO4 (XI), CaCO3 (XII), MgSO4.7H2O(XIII), KCl (XV), FeSO4.7H2O (XVI), MgSO4.7H2O (XIX) and biotin (XX) had significant (p<0.01) effect on L-methionine fermentation by the mutant, which was obtained from one way ANOVA. The coefficient of determinant (R2) of the model obtained from regression analysis was 0.861, suggesting thereby the model could explain up to 86.1% variation of the data. Thus the production of L-methionine by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 using Placket_Burman design showed wide range of variations which implied that it required further optimization.

Application of Box-Wilson central composite design for the optimization of L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300

The optimum level of the key variables and the effect of their interactions on L-methionine production by the mutant were further examined using Central Composite Design (CCD) of RSM.

The first CCD

The fermentation trials for L-methionine by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 were examined by CCD using the following variables: shaker’s speed (III), age of inoculum (IV), cell density (V), temperature (VI), glucose concentration (VIII), nitrogen concentration (IX), K2HPO4 (X), KH2PO4 (XI), CaCO3 (XII), MgSO4.7H2O (XIII), KCl (XV), FeSO4.7H2O (XVI), MnSO4.4H2O (XIX) and biotin (XX). The highest level of L-methionine was obtained up to 52.1 mg/ml with a biomass of 28.5 mg/ml and residual sugar content of 23.8%. Table 2 depicted the results of the second order Response Surface Models for L-methionine production by the mutant, obtained by one way ANOVA.

Source Degree of freedom (df) Sum of square Mean square F-value Probe˃F
Model 82.169 7 9.313 18.313 0.0016
Residual 7.321 5 0.861 16.328 0.0616
Lack of fit 70.613 2 0.331 18.792 0.0516
Pure error 0.168 3 0.062 21.613 0.0476
Total 94.316

Table 2: One way ANOVA for full quadratic model used for L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicumX300.

Chi square test with a very low probability value (α<0.001) indicated that the model was highly significant. R2 (0.982) indicated that the sample variation for L-methionine production of 98.2% was attributed to the independent variables and only 1.8% of total variation cannot be justified by the model (Tables 3-5).

Trial Factor L-methionine
(mg/ml)
[mean ± SEM]
Predictedvalue
(mg/ml)
Residual values
(mg/ml)
X3 X4 X5 X6      
1 150 48 6×108 31 13.6 ± 0.613 9.3 4.3
2 100 24 4×108 28 11.6 ± 0.998 10.1 1.5
3 100 72 4×108 25 10.8 ± 0.791 7.6 3.2
4 150 60 3×108 32 11.9 ± 0.991 9.1 2.8
5 100 36 5×108 28 13.2 ± 0.668 8.6 4.6
6 200 84 3×108 28 11.6 ± 0.792 9.3 2.3
7 150 60 6×108 27 13.3 ± 0.837 7.3 6.0
8 200 48 6×108 26 12.4 ± 0.991 8.1 4.3
9 100 48 3×108 30 14.8 ± 0.681 8.6 6.2
10 100 24 6×108 29 15.0 ± 0.927 9.4 5.6
11 150 72 6×108 32 14.2 ± 0.883 8.1 6.1
12 300 60 5×108 31 13.1 ± 0.813 7.6 5.5
13 150 84 4×108 31 13.6 ± 0.698 9.4 4.2
14 100 72 4×108 25 11.6 ± 0.735 7.8 3.8
15 300 72 1×108 29 11.3 ± 0.919 6.8 4.5
16 300 84 3×108 60 12.2 ± 0.882 9.6 2.6
17 200 84 3×108 60 13.6 ± 0.881 10.9 2.7
18 200 72 4×108 48 12.1 ± 0.802 9.3 2.8
19 300 48 5×108 96 10.8 ± 0.682 9.3 1.5
20 150 60 5×108 96 11.8 ± 0.792 7.6 4.2
21 100 48 1×108 26 11.3 ± 0.993 9.3 2.0
22 300 48 1×108 30 13.7 ± 0.813 10.6 3.1
23 150 60 5×108 30 12.6 ± 0.779 10.1 2.5
24 300 60 6×108 28 13.1 ± 0.681 6.1 7.0
25 200 72 3×108 28 14.3 ± 0.983 8.3 6.0
26 200 84 4×108 25 12.4 ± 0.779 9.6 2.8
27 200 84 4×108 26 11.7 ± 0.681 9.1 2.6
28 300 48 5×108 25 13.2 ± 0.832 10.4 2.8
29 200 48 3×108 26 11.4 ± 0.913 9.6 1.8
30 300 60 5×108 26 12.6 ± 0.872 8.3 4.3
31 200 72 1×108 30 11.3 ± 0.881 8.3 3.0
32 250 48   28 11.8 ± 0.692 7.9 3.9

Table 3: L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicumX300 using significant physical parameters based on CCD.

Trial Factor Lmethionine (mg/ml) Predicted value (mg/ml) Residual Value (mg/ml)
VIII IX X XI XII XIII XV XVI XIX XX      
1 40 2.0 1.2 2.0 3.0 1.2 0.5 20 0.0 00 49.6±0.913 46.8 2.8
2 20 10 2.3 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.0 5.0 1.6 80 41.6±0.772 37.6 4.0
3 140 7.0 1.4 0.0 1.5 0.6 1.0 20 6.0 2.0 36.3±0.832 31.2 5.1
4 40 7.0 1.0 1.2 2.5 0.3 0.0 35 2.5 1.6 50.1±0.661 42.8 7.3
5 60 1.4 1.8 1.0 2.5 1.8 2.0 20 2.0 4.0 52.2±0.992 44.6 7.4
6 40 1.0 2.0 2.1 3.0 0.3 2.0 35 3.0 4.6 50.3±0.683 46.1 4.2
7 60 1.4 2.2 1.8 3.0 0.6 1.0 5.0 3.0 2.6 49.6±0.813 44.3 5.3
8 120 2.0 2.1 1.6 1.5 0.3 1.0 5.0 4.5 4.1 48.2±0.669 41.6 6.6
9 80 1.4 2.1 1.6 1.0 1.5 1.6 10 2.0 6.1 50.3±0.832 46.4 3.9
10 40 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.2 1.7 20 4.0 4.8 46.8± 41.6 5.2
11 120 1.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.0 20 0.0 3.9 31.3±0.661 28.3 3.0
12 140 4.0 1.8 1.8 0.0 1.5 1.4 10 2.0 3.3 42.8±0.779 39.3 3.5
13 40 1.0 1.8 1.6 2.0 1.8 0.0 35 2.5 0.0 36.8±0.681 32.2 4.6
14 40 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.5 0.6 0.5 25 2.0 0.0 41.6±0.832 38.9 2.7
15 60 4.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.9 0.0 25 4.0 20 46.6±0.881 41.3 5.3
16 80 1.0 2.3 1.6 1.5 0.9 0.0 10 6.0 5.3 48.9±0.732 44.2 4.7
17 120 1.0 2.1 1.6 1.5 0.9 0.0 10 6.0 3.9 41.3±0.913 38.3 3.0
18 60 6.0 2.3 1.8 1.5 0.3 2.0 10 4.0 4.6 46.2±0.883 42.8 3.4
19 100 7.0 1.0 2.1 3.0 0.6 2.0 10 4.0 4.3 46.3±0.961 43.1 3.2
20 140 1.0 1.0 2.1 3.0 1.8 1.5 5.0 2.5 4.1 44.8±0.832 41.6 3.2
21 100 1.4 2.3 0.0 3.0 1.8 1.5 5.0 4.0 4.3 50.1±0.599 46.2 3.9
22 120 9.0 1.6 0.0 2.5 1.8 1.7 5.0 2.5 3.9 40.8±0.599 38.3 2.5
23 120 1.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.0 20 4.0 3.1 46.2±0.832 41.6 4.6
24 140 8.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.8 1.5 25 6.0 4.8 44.6±0.611 41.1 4.6
25 60 1.0 1.0 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.5 20 6.0 4.1 50.1±0.432 46.2 3.9
26 60 1.4 1.6 1.2 2.0 1.5 1.0 20 2.5 3.6 39.7±0.568 37.1 2.6
27 80 1.0 2.3 1.6 2.0 1.6 1.8 35 2.0 20 48.3±0.662 44.2 4.1
28 60 9.0 1.8 1.4 2.5 1.4 1.5 1.6 6.0 30 41.6±0.881 39.3 2.3
29 100 6.0 2.3 1.8 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.4 5.0 20 43.3±0.793 40.1 3.2
30 120 2.0 2.2 1.2 0.0 1.2 1.2 1.6 6.0 10 44.6±0.801 39.6 5.0
31 140 1.4 2.3 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.8 0.0 4.5 10 48.6±0.872 44.2 4.4
32 60 9.0 2.1 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.5 2.4 6.0 20 40.1±0.661 38.1 2.0

Table 4: L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 using significant nutritional parameters based on CCD.

Variable Coefficient Standard error of mean Computed t-value p-value
Intercept 52.168 0.039 233.611 0.000
III 0.913 0.061 1.169 0.016
IV 0.682 0.083 7.311 0.024
V 0.366 0.072 5.316 0.136
VI 0.611 0.091 2.618 0.613
VIII 0.732 0.059 4.813 0.024
IX 0.682 0.061 6.161 0.126
X 0.399 0.033 7.133 0.311
XI 0.816 0.042 4.613 0.791
XII 0.913 0.061 19.613 0.066
XIII 0.331 0.055 11.611 0.168
XIV -0.068 0.061 -5.613 0.002
XV 0.611 0.066 6.918 0.069
XVI 0.382 0.079 9.832 0.361
XIX 0.791 0.069 8.622 0.162
XX 0.668 0.063 6.913 0.113

Table 5: Model coefficient calculated from linear regression for the assessment of the significance of the independent variables.

All total 32 experimental trials for both physical and nutritional variables were examined for the estimation of the principal effects and multi-factors interactions. The production of L-methionine was increased significantly (p<0.01) after optimization of nutritional parameters compared to the optimization of physical parameters.

The second CCD

Table 6 depicted the second order CCD for L-methionine production in the form of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic model.

Source of data Sum of square Degree of freedom (df) Mean square F-value p-value˃F
Model 0.841 5 0.313 1230.14 <0.0001
III 0.797 6 0.331 226.64 0.0046
IV 0.401 3 0.210 86.46 <0.0001
V 0.616 6 0.339 117.64 <0.0001
VI 0.731 5 0.361 237.81 0.0024
VIII 0.611 3 0.305 373.61 <0.0001
IX 0.383 1 0.116 423.64 0.0069
X 0.770 1 0.216 874.84 0.0011
XI 0.463 3 0.169 321.61 0.0022
XII 0.511 9 0.312 72.21 <0.0001
XIII 0.663 3 0.226 123.81 0.0013
XV 0.634 3 0.213 321.21 0.0014
XVI 0.481 5 0.161 723.61 <0.0001
XIX 0.514 1 0.226 54.33 <0.0001
XX 0.681 4 0.261 222.21 0.0017
Residual 1.613 4 0.246 - -
Pure error 0.000 4 0.000 - -
Lack of fit 1.613 1 0.661 - -
Total 10.66

Table 6: One way ANOVA for Response Surface Quadratic Model for L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300.

Discussion

Shih and Shen applied RSM to examine the yeast extract, glucose, ammonium sulphate and initial pH on the production of poly €-lysine by Streptomyces albulus IFO 14147 in shake-flask fermentation. They obtained both the first order with interactions model (R2=0.9660) which was more adequate than the pure first order model (R2=0.8759). They have applied CCD for the assessment of the optimum composition. Their experimental data were fitted with a second-order polynomial euation by a multiple regression analysis. The determination of coefficient (R2=0.816) and the Fisher’s test (significant at upper 5%) indicated a good adequacy of the secondorder polynomial model used to analyze the data [5]. Nilofer et al. used RSM to optimize the variables of L-lysine fermentation by Corynebacterium glutamicum AEC-2. They used Plackett-Burman design and obtained four variables (the level of sugar in molasses, ammonium sulphate, and incubation temperature and inoculum size) were proved to be significant for L-lysine production. Furthermore, CCD (24 factorial) was applied to determine the optimum levels of significant variables. A second order polynomial regression model was used to explain the experimental data. Using these models, the production of L-lysine was increased up to 2.6 fold [6]. Pandey and Banik, optimized six factors (namely: pH, temperature, fermentation time, orbital speed, age of inoculum and inoculums volume) for alkaline phosphate production by Bacillus licheniformis using RSM. They have reported that pH, temperature, fermentation time and orbital speed were significant (p<0.05) using Placket Berman design methodology. An increase up to 1.5 fold in the production was obtained after optimization of the production using RSM [7]. Shankar et al. examined the invertase production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae MK. The optimum levels of the key variables (orange peel, yeast extract and methionine) was applied to determine their interactions on the production using CCD and RSM. The determined coefficient of determination (R2=0.9994) was nearer to 1 which satisfied the adjustment of the quadratic model to the experimental data [1]. Patel et al. compared between one at a time variation factors and CCD for the production of mycophenolic acid by Penicillum brevicompactum MTCC8010 in a 12-day batch culture. The medium optimization using one-at-a-time variation gave 6 fold greater titer, whereas CCD gave almost 9 fold greater titer compare to the production prior to the optimization [21].

Conclusion

The nearness of the coefficient of determinant (R2=0.9982) for one way ANOVA for full quadratic model and the same for one way ANOVA for Response Surface Quadratic Model (R2=0.9991) used for L-methionine production by Corynebacterium glutamicum X300 ensured the satisfactory adjustment of the Quadratic model to explain the data obtained from the present experiment. The maximum production of L-methionine (52.1 mg/ml) was obtained with 72 h of incubation.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Recommended Conferences

Article Usage

  • Total views: 454
  • [From(publication date):
    June-2017 - Sep 21, 2018]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 407
  • PDF downloads : 47
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2018-19
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

bornova escort

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9040

Clinical Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Food & Nutrition Journals

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics & Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Materials Science Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Nursing & Health Care Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

Ann Jose

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

 
© 2008- 2018 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version