A comparison of three pH control methods for revealing effects of undissociated butyric acid on specific butanol production rate in batch fermentation of Clostridium acetobutylicum.

0.44 MB·English

by  Yang, Xuepeng

Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Open Access
A comparison of three pH control methods for
revealing effects of undissociated butyric acid on
specific butanol production rate in batch
Clostridium acetobutylicum
fermentation of
Xuepeng Yang1, Maobing Tu1,2*, Rui Xie1, Sushil Adhikari2 and Zhaohui Tong3
Abstract
pH control has been essential for butanol production with Clostridium acetobutylicum.However, it is not very clear
atwhat pH level theacid crash will occur, atwhat pH level butanol production will be dominant, and atwhat pH
levelbutyricacid production will be prevailing.Furthermore, contradictory results have been reported about
required acidic conditions for initiation of solventogenesis. Inthis study, with the aim of further understanding the
roleof undissociatedbutyric acid in butanol production,weinvestigated thecorrelation between undissociated
butyric acid concentration and specific butanol production rate inbatchfermentation of Clostridium acetobutylicum
bycomparing threepH control approaches:NaOH neutralization (at 12, 24 or 36 h), CaCO supplementation (2, 5,
3
or 8g/l) and NaOAc buffering (pH 4.6, 5.0or 5.6). By neutralizing thefermentationpH to ~5.0 at different time, we
observed that neutralization should take place atthe beginning of exponential phase (12 h), and otherwise
resulting in lower concentrations ofundissociated butyric acid, cell biomass and final butanol. CaCO
3
supplementation extended cell growthto 36 h and resulted in higher butyrate yield under 8g/L of CaCO .In the
3
NaOAc buffering, the highest specific butanol rate (0.58 h−1) was associated with the highest undissociatedbutyric
acid (1.92 g/L). The linear correlation of theundissociated butyric acid with thespecific butanol production rates
suggested theundissociated butyric acid could be themajor driving force for butanol production.
Keywords: Butanol, Butyric acid, Fermentation, Undissociated butyricacid, Clostridium acetobutylicum
Introduction fermentation or ABE fermentation” (Jones and Woods
Butanol is one of the promising advanced biofuels and 1986). The typical products ratio from this process with
an important intermediate in chemical synthesis. It is ClostridiumacetobutylicumisA:B:E=3:6:1.C.acetobu-
being pursued by industry and the U.S. government (the tylicum is capable of fermenting hexose and pentose
DOE, USDA and NSF) for the next generation of alter- sugars to butanol, but solvent yields and fermentation
native fuels (Hess 2006; Li et al. 2011a; Li et al. 2011b; rates have varied depending on strains and fermentation
Milne et al. 2011; Qureshi and Ezeji 2008). Butanol, as conditions(Qureshietal.2008).Thefermentationprocess
one of the alternative biofuels, has several advantages by C. acetobutylicum is divided into two distinct phases:
over ethanol (the main transportation biofuel candidate) rapid cell growth and production of butyric acids take
such as low vapor pressure and tolerance to water con- place in a first acidogenic phase accompanied by pH de-
tamination (Hess 2006). Butanol production from sugars crease, which is then replaced by a second solventogenic
by fermentation is known as “acetone-butanol-ethanol phaseinwhichbutanolandothersolvents(mainlyacetone
andethanol)areproduced,leadingtopHincrease(Bryant
*Correspondence:[email protected] and Blaschek 1988; Holt et al. 1984; Huang et al. 1986;
1ForestProductsLabandCenterforBioenergyandBioproducts,Auburn
HusemannandPapoutsakis1988;Monotetal.1984).
University,520DevallDrive,Auburn,AL36849,USA
2DepartmentofBiosystemsEngineering,AuburnUniversity,Auburn,AL Previously, extensive research has been focused on the
36849,USA mechanismsof“acidcrash”andinitiationofsolventogenesis
Fulllistofauthorinformationisavailableattheendofthearticle
©2013Yangetal.;licenseeSpringer.ThisisanOpenAccessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommons
AttributionLicense(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),whichpermitsunrestricteduse,distribution,andreproduction
inanymedium,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlycited.
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page2of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
(Martin et al. 1983; Wang et al. 2011; Zverlov et al. 2006). Clostridia Medium (RCM) with the addition of agar in a
Acid crash occurs in pH uncontrolled fermentation and RT Anaero-Indicator. Isolated colony was cultured an-
results in the cessation of glucose uptake, acids production aerobically in 50 mL of 38 g/L of RCM at 35°C for 24 h
andbutanolproduction(Maddoxetal.2000).Theoverpro- and left aerobically in ambient temperature overnight
ductionofundissociatedacids(>60mM)withlowpHcould for the production of spores. The spores were washed
be the main cause for acid crash (Maddox et al. 2000). Re- and re-suspended in sterile water as the pre-inoculum
cently, formic acid has also been suggested to trigger the (OD =2). Before inoculation, the pre-inoculum was
600
acid crash of butanol production by C. acetobutylicum treated with heat shock at 80°C for 10 min. The heat
(Wang et al. 2011). Initiation of solventogenesis has been shocked spores were cultured anaerobically into 50 mL
correlated well with the concentration of undissociated of RCM liquid medium at 35°C for 12 h as seed inocu-
butyricacid(Huangetal.1986;HusemannandPapoutsakis lum. 5 mL of the seed inoculum was added into the
1988;Monotetal.1984).Ithasbeensuggestedthatsolvent 50 mL fermentation broth. All the culture experiments
productioninitiatedattheminimumof1.5g/Lofundissoci- were conducted in 125 mL serum bottles. All the media
ated butyric acid (Monot et al. 1984). A linear correlation were autoclaved at 121°C for 20 min before the inocula-
has been found between butanol and undissociated butyric tion.CelldensitywasmeasuredbyaUV–visspectrometer
acid concentration at the onset of solvent formation at 600 nm. The dry cell weight (DCW) was calculated
(HusemannandPapoutsakis1988).Theadditionofacetate, from the optical density based on the following equation
butyrate and propionate could improve the final solvent DCW(g/L)=0.3A .
600
yields, but not much on the initiation of solventogenesis
(Fond et al. 1985; Husemann and Papoutsakis 1990; Yu
FermentationandpHcontrolmethods
and Saddler 1983). However, the solvent formation could
The fermentation was carried out in 125 mL serum bot-
also be initiated at neutral pH (6.8–7.0) with the supple-
tles with 50 mL of P2 medium containing (g/L): glucose,
mentation of high concentration of acetate plus butyrate
50; yeast extract, 1.0; ammonium acetate, 2.2; KH PO ,
(GeorgeandChen1983;Holtetal.1984). 2 4
0.5; K HPO , 0.5; MgSO ·7H O, 0.2; MnSO ·7H O,
It is believed that the accumulation of a threshold 2 4 4 2 4 2
0.01; FeSO ·7H O, 0.01; NaCl, 0.01. All the media were
amount of butyric acid initiates the solvent production. 4 2
bubbled through nitrogen for 10 min to remove oxygen
Particularly, the undissociated butyric acid excreted in
andautoclavedat121°Cfor20minbeforefermentationin-
the fermentation media re-enters the cells and serves
oculation. During the fermentation, samples were taken at
as the precursor for butanol production (Bryant and
regular intervals for analysis. Three different pH control-
Blaschek 1988; Husemann and Papoutsakis 1988).
lingmethodswereexaminedfortheireffectsonfermenta-
However, the excess of acids can be produced in the
tion by C. acetobutylicum. In the NaOH neutralization,
batch fermentation of C. acetobutylicum without pH
5 mL of 0.5 M NaOH was added into the fermentation
control, and subsequently causes the cessation of glu-
broths at 12 h, 24 h, or 36 h respectively during the fer-
cose utilization (Maddox et al. 2000). Therefore, pH
mentationto adjust thepHto~5.0. IntheCaCO supple-
control has been essential for butanol production with 3
mentation, 2 g/L, 5 g/L or 8 g/L of CaCO powder was
C. acetobutylicum (Bryant and Blaschek 1988; Huang 3
addedintothemediatocontrolthepHatthebeginningof
et al. 1986; Monotetal.1984;Roosetal.1985).However,
fermentation. In the sodium acetate buffering, the initial
it is not very clear at what pH level the acid crash will
fermentation pH was controlled at 4.6, 5.0, or 5.6 by vary-
occur,atwhatpHlevelbutanolproductionwillbedomin-
ing the ratio of HOAc/NaOAc. All the treatments were
ant, and at what pH level butyric acid production will be
conducted in duplicate. Fermentation broth without pH
prevailing. Also, contradictory results have been reported
controlwasusedasacontrol.
thatacidicconditionsarenotrequiredforinitiationofsol-
ventogenesis (George and Chen 1983). In this study, with
theaimofimprovingbutanolproductionyield,weinvesti- Analyticalmethods
gatedtheeffectsofdifferentpHcontrolmethodsonbuta- Glucose concentration was determined by HPLC or
nol and butyric acid production in batch fermentation by using the DNS method. Butanol and butyric acid were
C. acetobutylicum. In addition, we explored the potential analyzed by a Varian 3800 Gas Chromatography
mechanisms for the persistent butanol production under equipped with aVarian CP8400 autosampler, splitless in-
effectivepHcontrol. jector system, and flame ionization detector. The separ-
ation was conducted using a Stabilwax-DA column
Material and methods fitted with a 5 m deactivated guard column. The separ-
Microbialstrainandmedium ation conditions were used by a previously described
Clostridium acetobutylicum (ATCC 824) was used in method (Robinson et al. 2002). Butanol and butyric acid
this study. The strain was maintained on Reinforced were quantified bychromatographicgradestandards.pH
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page3of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
W
was determined using pH test strips (BDH , pH range The pH profile showed the fermentation pH was main-
3.6–6.1,pH graduation0.3/0.5). tained between 4.7 and 5.0 and the cell biomass reached
0.68g/Lat24h,andincreasedby70%ascomparedtothe
Results control. It appeared that acid flush was overcome under
EffectofNaOHneutralizationoncellgrowth,butanoland thisscenario.However,whenweneutralizedthefermenta-
butyricacidproductionbyC.acetobutylicum tion pH at 24 h and 36 h respectively, the glucose con-
To determine at what time and pH level the acid crash sumption was still ceased at 24 h and the butanol yields
will occur, we added 5 mL of 0.5 MNaOH at 12 h, 24 h, were very low at 72 h, both cases were similar to the fer-
and 36 h individually during the fermentation to control mentationcontrol.Itindicatedtheacidflushprobablyoc-
the pH between 4.7 and 5.3. These three time points curred early in the exponential phase (fermentation
corresponded to the beginning of the exponential phase, 12–24 h) in the pH range of 3.6–4.1, which likely is
the end of the exponential phase, and the stationary the reason why the later neutralization could not help
phase of cell growth. The results of butanol and butyric improve glucose consumption and butanol production.
acid yields were given in Table 1 and further details of As for butyric acid production, with the NaOH
pH profiles, cell growth, glucose consumption and buta- neutralization at 12 h, the concentration of butyrate
nol production were shown in Figure 1. Without pH increased significantly from 1.4 g/L (without pH control)
control (Figure 1A), the fermentation pH dropped to 4.1 to4.3g/L at24h(Figures1AandB),andthendecreased
at 12 h, 3.6 at 24 h,and remained at 3.6 until 36 h.After significantlyforbutanolproduction.Itappearedthatmore
that, the fermentation pH started to increase and butyrate was converted into butanol when the fermenta-
reached 4.4 at 72 h. The cells grew slowly in the first tion pH is controlled around 4.7. Our results agreed well
12 h of lag phase, and then increased dramatically from withthepreviousreportthatathresholdamountofundis-
12 to 24 h (the exponential phase). When the pH sociated butyric acid was required to start the solvento-
dropped to approximately 3.6, the cell growth ended at genesis (Husemann and Papoutsakis 1988; Monot et al.
24 h and the cell biomass reached 0.40 g/L. Similar 1984). Failing to control the pH at 12 h was presumed to
results have been reported previously when pH uncon- cause deactivation of key enzymes for acid and butanol
trolled batch fermentation of C. acetobutylicum was per- productionandevenkillthecells(Welchetal.1989).Asa
formed in a fermentor (Husemann and Papoutsakis result, neutralizing pH at 24 and 36 h after acid flush
1990). The butanol production started from 12 h and couldnotleadtoanyimprovementofbutanolproduction.
slowly increased to 5.7 g/L at 72 h. More than 50% of This assumption was in agreement with the glucose
glucose was not consumed due to the potential acid utilization, which was stopped after 24 h in these two
crash. The acid crash seemed to take place before 24 h casesaswellasinthefermentationcontrol(Figure1).
and the glucose consumption was ceased afterwards.
This phenomenon can be described more precisely as EffectofCaCO supplementationoncellgrowth,butanol
3
“acid flush” because the excessive acids or low pH cause andbutyricacidproductionbyC.acetobutylicum
a weak fermentation in the solventogenic phase, rather CaCO has been used to neutralize organic acids during
3
“crash” solvent production and fermentation completely fermentation and to maintain pH at a certain range
(Figure 1A). (Huangetal.2005;Vandaketal.1997).Toevaluateitsef-
WhenweneutralizedthepHto5.3withNaOHat12h, fect on fermentation by C. acetobutylicum, we examined
the glucose was completely consumed and the final buta- the effects of CaCO supplement (2, 5, 8 g/L) on butanol
3
nol yield increased dramatically to 11.9 g/L (Figure 1B). and butyric acid production by C. acetobutylicum. The
Table1EffectofdifferentpHregulationmethodsoncellgrowthandbutanolproductionbyC.acetobutylicum
pHcontrol NaOHneutralization CaCO supplementation NaOAcbuffering(pH)
3
12h 24h 36h 2g/L 5g/L 8g/L 4.6 5.0 5.6
pHat24ha 4.7±0.0 3.6±0.0 3.6±0.0 4.4±0.0 4.7±0.0 5.3±0.0 4.1±0.0 4.4±0.0 5.0±0.0
Cb 11.9±0.7 3.8±0.0 4.9±0.1 8.8±0.4 10.8±0.1 7.9±0.4 6.5±0.3 12.3±0.9 8.3±0.4
butanol
Cc 4.3±0.3 1.8±0.2 1.7±0.1 4.0±0.3 5.4±0.5 6.2±0.2 2±0.3 2.7±0.5 4.0±0.2
butyricacid
Biomass 0.69±0.03 0.45±0.06 0.39±0.02 0.45±0.05 0.41±0.02 0.53±0.01 0.51±0.03 0.63±0.02 0.70±0.04
Cd 2.18±0.14 1.0±0.08 1.6±0.09 2.68±0.18 3.01±0.26 1.50±0.05 1.70±0.28 1.92±0.32 1.32±0.07
UBA
q 0.41±0.02 0.22±0.09 0.42±0.02 0.49±0.06 0.52±0.01 0.25±0.02 0.44±0.01 0.58±0.01 0.36±0.02
p
apHat24h:pHvaluesat24hoffermentation.bC (g/L):Finalbutanolconcentrationat72h.Biomass(g/L):Cellbiomassat24h.cC :Butyricacid
butanol butyricacid
concentrationat24h(peakconcentration).C (g/L):Concentrationofundissociatedbutyricacidat24h.
UBA
q:Specificbutanolproductionrates(between24and36h,h−1)werecalculatedbasedonthefollowingequation:q =(C −C )/(12×
p p butanol,36h butanol,24h
Xcellbiomass,24h).
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page4of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
A B
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7 7
50 Glucose 12 0.8 50 Glucose Butanol 12 0.8
6 40 pH 10 6 40 pH 10
0.6 0.6
8 8
pH45 Glucose (g/L) 2300 Butanol 46 Products (g/L) 00..24Biomass (g/L) pH 45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butyric acid Acetone 46 Products (g/L) 00..24 Biomass g/L ()
10 Biomass Acetic acid Acetone 2 10 Biomass Acetic acid 2
3 0 Butyric acid Ethanol 0 0.0 3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h) Fermentation time (h)
C D
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7 7
50 Glucose 12 0.8 50 Glucose 12 0.8
6 40 pH 10 6 40 pH 10
0.6 0.6
8 8
pH45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butanol 46 Products (g/L) 0.4Biomass (g/L) pH 45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butanol 46Products (g/L) 0.4Biomass (g/L)
0.2 0.2
10 Biomass BAucteytriicc aacciidd 2 10 Biomass Butyric acid Acetic acid 2
3 0 Acetone Ethanol 0 0.0 3 0 AEctehtaonnoel 0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h) Fermentation time (h)
Figure1EffectofNaOHneutralizationonbutanolproductionbyC.acetobutylicum(A:fermentationcontrolwithoutpHcontrol;B
neutralizationat12h;C:neutralizationat24h;D:neutralizationat36h).
initial pH was 6.5 for all the CaCO supplement treat- fermentation,thepHwas4.4,4.7,and5.3withtheCaCO
3 3
mentsandthecontrol.TheresultsshowedCaCO supple- supplementation at 2, 5 and 8 g/L respectively. And the
3
mentation improved glucose uptake significantly resulting corresponding undissociated butyric acid was 2.7, 3.0 and
innearlycompleteconsumptionofglucose(Figure2A-C). 1.5g/Lat24h.Thefinalbutanolconcentration(10.8g/L)
Interestingly, we found that the CaCO supplementation was higher when the fermentation pH (24 h) was kept at
3
at the concentration of 2, 5 or 8 g/L extended the cell 4.7thanthat(8.8g/L)atpH5.3.Itsuggestedthatbutanol
growth to 36 h, and correspondingly increased the cell production was not only related to the cell biomass, but
biomassfrom0.43g/L(control)to0.51,0.57and0.67g/L alsocorrelated tothe fermentationpHand the undissoci-
at 36 h respectively. Consequently, we observed that the ated butyric acid. With the CaCO supplementation, the
3
butanol production rates (between 36–48 h) increased fermentation pH controlled between 4.4 and 5.3 at 24 h
dramatically from 0.05 g/L h (the control) to 0.10, 0.36 could overcome the acid flush, but higher undissociated
and0.24g/L·hwhentheCaCO supplementationofat2, butyric acid probably was a prerequisite for fast butanol
3
5,and8g/Lrespectively.Thisindicatedthestrongcorrel- production in the solventogenic phase. The results also
ation between cell biomass and butanol production, but indicated that keeping higher pH (5.3) in fermentation
highcell biomass could also result in higherbutyrate, not favored higher butyric acid production. Although the
butanol ifthe pHwasnot controlled within the appropri- butyric acid could be converted into butanol in the later
ate range. For example, the higher CaCO supplementa- solventogenic phase; the final butyric acid concentration
3
tion (8 g/L) resulted in the highest cell biomass and was still high. The similar results of pH effect on butyric
butyrateconcentration(4.0g/L)at72h,whilethebutanol acid productionwerereportedinthepreviousresearchin
concentration was only 7.8 g/L. (Figure 2B and 2C). The which Monot et al. found that the medium with higher
highest butanol concentration reached 10.8 g/L at 72 h pH level produced more acids than the medium with
with the supplementation of 5 g/L CaCO . At 24 h of lowerpHlevel(Monotetal.1984).
3
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page5of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
A B
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7
50 Glucose 12 0.8 7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
6 40 pH 10 50 Glucose Butanol 12 0.8
Butanol 0.6 6 40 pH 10
8 0.6
pH45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butyric acid Acetone 46Products (g/L) 00..24Biomass (g/L) pH45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butyric acid 468Products (g/L) 0.4Biomass (g/L)
10 Biomass Acetic acid 2 10 Biomass Acetic acid Acetone 2 0.2
3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0 3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h) Fermentation time (h)
C
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7
12
50 0.8
6 40 Glucose pH 10
0.6
pH45 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butyric acid Butanol 468 Products (g/L) 0.4Biomass (g/L)
Acetone 0.2
10 Biomass Acetic acid 2
3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h)
Figure2EffectofCaCO supplementationonbutanolproductionbyC.acetobutylicum(A:CaCO supplementationat2g/L;BCaCO
3 3 3
supplementationat5g/L;C:CaCO supplementationat8g/L).
3
Effectofsodiumacetatebufferingonbutanolandbutyric 4.4 resulted in the termination of glucose consump-
acidproductionbyC.acetobutylicum tion. We also observed the lag phase was reduced sig-
Bufferingisanothercommonmethodusedinvariousfer- nificantly at the high initial buffering pH (5.0 and 5.6)
mentation processes to regulate pH (Bryant and Blaschek compared with that at a low buffering pH (4.6). Buffer-
1988). Therefore, the effects of different initial NaOAc ing the initial pH at 5.0 produced the highest butanol
buffering pH on butanol and butyric acid production concentration 12.3 g/L at 72 h. Although buffering the
by C. acetobutylicum were investigated to evaluate its initial pH at 5.6 had the highest butyric acid concen-
effectiveness in comparison with those of CaCO sup- tration 4.0 g/L at 24 h, further conversion of butyric
3
plementation and NaOH neutralization. Sodium acet- acid to butanol was slow and the butanol yield
ate was chosen to buffer pH at 4.6, 5.0, and 5.6 initially remained at a low level at the end of fermentation.
by changing the ratio of NaOAc and HOAc. The results Comparing three pH control methods revealed high
showed that NaOAc buffering at different initial pH similarities of the fermentation patterns between the
could affect the fermentation pH profiles, cell growth, sodium acetate buffering and the CaCO supplementa-
3
glucose consumption and butanol production signifi- tion. In both methods, maintaining the pH above 5.0
cantly (Figure 3A-C). Buffering at initial pH 5.0 and at 24 h favored the butyric acid production, maintain-
5.6 appeared to overcome the acid flush and enable ing the pH between 4.4 and 4.7 at 24 h promoted the
complete glucose consumption, while buffering at ini- butanol production. More interestingly, this optimal
tial pH 4.6 resulted in incomplete consumption of glu- pH favoring the butanol production was also reflected
cose and ~20 g/L glucose was not utilized at 72 h. At in the NaOH neutralization, in which the pH at 24 h
the end of exponential phase (24 h), the cell biomass was 4.7 by adjusting pH with NaOH at 12 h. The
reached 0.51, 0.63, 0.70 g/L and the fermentation pH observed cell growth took place mainly between 12
dropped to 4.1, 4.4, and 5.0 respectively (for initial buf- and 24 h in fermentation, the cell biomass (DCW)
fering pH at 4.6, 5.0 and 5.6). This indicated that pH increased from 0.1 g/L (at 12 h) to 0.7 g/L (at 24 h),
4.4 probably was a threshold for acid flush, pH below and then remained almost constant. It suggested the
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page6of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
A B
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7 10
50 Glucose 12 0.8 50 Glucose Butanol 12 0.8
8
6 40 10 40 10
0.6 0.6
pH45 Glucose (g/L)2300 pH Butanol 468Products (g/L) 00..24Biomass (g/L) pH46 Glucose (g/L)2300 BipoHmass Butyric acid Acetone 468Products (g/L) 00..24Biomass (g/L)
10 Biomass Acetic acid Acetone 2 2 10 Acetic acid 2
Butyric acid
3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0 0 Ethanol 0 0.0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h)
Fermentation time (h)
C
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
7
50 12
Glucose 0.8
6 40 10
0.6
pH Butanol 8
pH5 Glucose (g/L)2300 Butyric acid 46Products (g/L) 0.4Biomass (g/L)
4
0.2
10 Biomass
Acetone Acetic acid 2
3 0 Ethanol 0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Fermentation time (h)
Figure3EffectofNaOAcbufferingonbutanolproductionbyC.acetobutylicum(A:NaOAcbufferingatinitialpH4.6;BNaOAc
bufferingatinitialpH5.0;C:NaOAcbufferingatinitialpH5.6).
first 12–24 h probably was the exponential phase of
cell growth and butyric acid was produced associated
withcellgrowthmainlyinthisphase.Attheendofexpo-
nential phase, bacteria started to generate the butanol
dehydrogenase, which was responsible for producing
butanol. Therefore, controlling the fermentation pH
between 4.4–4.7 at 12–24 h is essential for the maximum 0.80 CaCO supplementation
3
butanolproduction. Sodium acetate buffering
0.75 buffering at pH 5.6
h)
6
Discussion s (3 0.70
s
a
EffectsofpHcontrolonthemaximumbiomass m 0.65
To seek the potential mechanisms involved in persistent Bio buffering at pH 5.0 8 g/L CaCO3
m 0.60
butanol production, we observed both the cell biomass u
m buffering at pH 4.6
and the undissociated butyric acids correlated well with Maxi 0.55 5 g/L CaCO3
butanol production rates. The cell biomass could be
related to the total enzyme activity in the later solvent 0.50 2 g/L CaCO3
productionphase.UnderthepHcontrolwithCaCO sup-
3 0.45
plementation and NaOAc buffering, the cell biomass 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4
reachedthemaximumat36h.Weobservedalinearrela- Fermentation pH at 24 h
tionship between the maximum cell biomass and the fer- Figure4CorrelationbetweenfermentationpH(24h)and
mentation pH at 24 h (Figure 4). This indicated that the maximumbiomass(36h)inthebatchfermentationofC.
acetobutylicum.
higher pH at the end of exponential phases (in the pH
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page7of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
range of 4.1–5.3), the higher the maximum biomass was
achieved. This finding was consistent with the previ- 0.60
ous report with a pH-controlled batch fermentation of -1h) 0.55
C. acetobutylicum using a fermentor (Monot et al. 1984), s (
e
inwhichtheincreaseofthefermentationpHbetweenpH at 0.50
n r
4.5and5.5enhancedthemaximumbiomass,butlowered o
cti 0.45
the maximum biomass at a pH level higher than pH 6.0. du
o
In our work, we did not carry out the experiment at pr 0.40
pH≥6.0 because the low butanol yield would be pro- anol 0.35
duced at a higher pH. Figure 4 also showed thatbuffer- but CaCO3 supplementation
ing the initial pH at 4.6 resulted in the fermentation cific 0.30 Sodium acetate buffering
e
pH 4.1 at 24 h and the lowest maximum biomass at sp 0.25
36 h. It indicated the low pH (~4.1) at the end of expo- q, p
0.20
nential phase inhibited the cell growth and the glucose 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2
utilization. The decease of pH from 4.6 to 4.1 was C , Undissociated butyric acid (g/L)
UBA
likely caused by the production of butyric acid and acetic
Figure5Correlationbetweenundissociatedbutyricacid
acid in the acidogenic phase, where both acids reached concentration(24h)andspecificbutanolproductionrate
their maximum concentrations at 24 h (Figures 1, 2, 3). (between24and36h)inthebatchfermentationofC.
Butyric acid and acetic acid have been reported as two acetobutylicum.
majortoxicproductsinhibitingcell growthofC.acetobu-
tylicum based on their low inhibition constants (0.07 M required to initiate the solventogenesis (Husemann and
and 0.19 M respectively)(Costa and Moreira 1983). As a Papoutsakis 1988; Monot et al. 1984). In our experi-
result, microorganism probably develops a detoxification ments, the onset of solvent production took place at
process involved a series of enzymes to convert butyric much lower level of the undissociated butyric acid
acid to butanol, and acetic acid to acetone in a solven- (0.20–0.30 g/L), which may attributed to the use of dif-
togenic phase (Monot et al. 1984). Therefore, relatively ferent media and pH controlled methods. The persistent
low pH (<5.0) at the end of exponential phase is essen- butanol production could be more important than initial
tial to maintain the persistent solvent production. butanol production, since the persistent solvent produc-
More precisely, the concentration of undissociated tion would be essential for a higher final butanol con-
butyric acid probably controls the butanol production centration at the end of fermentation. The specific
rates in solventogenesis. butanol production rates at the end of exponential phase
could represent the capability of persistent butanol pro-
Effectsoftheundissociatedbutyricacidonspecific duction. For example, in the both cases of CaCO sup-
3
butanolproductionrates plementation (5 g/L) and NaOAc buffering (pH 5.0), the
The correlation of the undissociated butyric acid (at higher the specific butanol production rates (0.52 h−1
24 h) with the specific butanol production rates between and 0.58 h−1), the higher the final butanol concentration
24 and 36 h was established in the fermentations with (10.8 g/L and 12.3 g/L) (Table 1). The cell biomass is es-
CaCO supplementation and NaOAc buffering. The bu- sential for the evaluation of the persistent butanol prod-
3
tanol production rates increased dramatically between uctivity and therefore has been taken into accounts for
24 and 36 h. The undissociated butyric acid reached the the specific butanol production rates, because the
maximum concentration at 24 h (the end of exponential enzymes (butanol dehydrogenase and CoA transferase)
phase) except for the cases by adding 8 g/L of CaCO or induced or produced for solventogenesis are related to
3
buffering the initial pH at 5.6. In these two special cases, the cell biomass. The undissociated acetic acid was
the maximum concentration of undissociated butyric suggested not required for solventogenesis (Husemann
acid wasobtained at 36h;consequently the butanol pro- and Papoutsakis 1988). But the addition of acetate and
duction rates were maximized between 36 and 48 h propionate could enhance final solvent concentrations
probably due to the extended cell growth. Figure 5 (Husemann and Papoutsakis 1990; Mattaelammouri
showed the specific butanol production rates (between et al. 1987). And the addition of butyrate demonstrated
24 and 36) were a function of the undissociated butyric the potential to initiate the solvent production at pH 5
acid concentration (at 24 h). The linear relationship be- (Holt et al. 1984). The addition of butyrate probable
tween them indicated the undissociated butyric acid was increases the concentration of undissociated butyric
the major driving force for the production of butanol. acid, which can induce the corresponding enzymes
Previously, others have reported a minimum amount synthesis and drive the butanol production (Husemann
(0.5 g/L–1.5 g/L) of undissociated butyric acid was and Papoutsakis 1989).
Yangetal.AMBExpress2013,3:3 Page8of8
http://www.amb-express.com/content/3/1/3
In this study, the pH control was essential for the im- HusemannMHW,PapoutsakisET(1990)Effectsofpropionateandacetate
provement of butanol production by C. acetobutylicum, additionsonsolventproductioninbatchculturesofclostridium-
acetobutylicum.ApplEnvironMicrob56(5):1497–1500
because the appropriate pH in the exponential phase
JonesDT,WoodsDR(1986)Acetone-butanolfermentationrevisited.Microbiol
could enhance the specific butanol production rates by Rev50(4):484–524
producing higher undissociated butyric acid. NaOH LiSY,SrivastavaR,ParnasRS(2011a)Studyofinsitu1-butanolpervaporation
froma-B-EfermentationusingaPDMScompositemembrane:validityof
neutralization was a simple method to control the pH,
solution-diffusionmodelforpervaporativea-B-Efermentation.Biotechnol
and the key time to adjust the fermentation pH is the Progr27(1):111–120
beginning of exponential phase. CaCO supplementation LiSY,SrivastavaR,SuibSL,LiY,ParnasRS(2011b)Performanceofbatch,fed-
3
batch,andcontinuousa-B-EfermentationwithpH-control.Bioresource
resulted in relatively low content of cell biomass and Technol102(5):4241–4250
high yield of butyrate. NaOAc buffering at pH 5.0 MaddoxIS,SteinerE,HirschS,WessnerS,GutierrezNA,GapesJR,SchusterKC
enabled a highest butanol production rate in the station- (2000)Thecauseof“acidcrash”and“acidogenicfermentations”dupingthe
batchacetone-butanol-ethanol(ABE-)fermentationprocess.JMolMicrob
ary phase. The linear correlation of the undissociated Biotech2(1):95–100
butyric acid with the specific butanol production rates MartinJR,PetitdemangeH,BallongueJ,GayR(1983)Effectsofaceticandbutyric
suggests the undissociated butyric acid could be the acidsonsolventsproductionbyclostridium-acetobutylicum.BiotechnolLett
5(2):89–94
major driving force for butanol production. The key to
MattaelammouriG,JanatiidrissiR,JunellesAM,PetitdemangeH,GayR(1987)
achieve high butanol concentration is to maintain a pH Effectsofbutyricandacetic-acidsonacetonebutanolformationby
level around 4.7 and a higher level of undissociated clostridium-acetobutylicum.Biochimie69(2):109–115
MilneCB,EddyJA,RajuR,ArdekaniS,KimPJ,SengerRS,JinYS,BlaschekHP,
butyric acidduringtheexponential phaseofcellgrowth.
PriceND(2011)Metabolicnetworkreconstructionandgenome-scalemodel
ofbutanol-producingstrainclostridiumbeijerinckiiNCIMB8052.BMCSyst
Biol5(130).doi:10.1186/1752-0509-5-130
Competinginterests
MonotF,EngasserJM,PetitdemangeH(1984)InfluenceofpHandundissociated
Theauthorsdeclarethattheyhavenocompetinginterests.
butyric-acidontheproductionofacetoneandbutanolinbatchculturesof
clostridium-acetobutylicum.ApplMicrobiolBiot19(6):422–426
Acknowledgements QureshiN,EzejiTC(2008)Butanol,‘asuperiorbiofuel’productionfrom
ThisstudywassupportedinpartbygrantsfromAlabamaAgricultural agriculturalresidues(renewablebiomass):recentprogressintechnology.
ExperimentalStation. BiofuelBioprodBior2(4):319–330
QureshiN,SahaBC,CottaMA(2008)Butanolproductionfromwheatstrawby
Authordetails simultaneoussaccharificationandfermentationusingclostridiumbeijerinckii:
1ForestProductsLabandCenterforBioenergyandBioproducts,Auburn partII-Fed-batchfermentation.BiomassBioenerg32(2):176–183
University,520DevallDrive,Auburn,AL36849,USA.2Departmentof RobinsonJR,KeatingJK,BoussaidAB,MansfieldSM,SaddlerJS(2002)The
BiosystemsEngineering,AuburnUniversity,Auburn,AL36849,USA. influenceofbarkonthefermentationofdouglas-firwhitewoodpre-
3DepartmentofAgricultureandBiologicalEngineering,UniversityofFlorida, hydrolysates.ApplMicrobiolBiotechnol59(4):443–448.doi:10.1007/s00253-
Gainesville,FL32611,USA. 002-1055-z
RoosJW,MclaughlinJK,PapoutsakisET(1985)TheeffectofpHonnitrogen
Received:6December2012Accepted:3January2013 supply,cell-lysis,andsolventproductioninfermentationsofclostridium-
Published:7January2013 acetobutylicum.BiotechnolBioeng27(5):681–694
VandakD,ZigovaJ,SturdikE,SchlosserS(1997)EvaluationofsolventandpHfor
extractivefermentationofbutyricacid.ProcessBiochem32(3):245–251
References
WangSH,ZhangYP,DongHJ,MaoSM,ZhuY,WangRJ,LuanGD,LiY(2011)
BryantDL,BlaschekHP(1988)Bufferingasameansforincreasinggrowthand Formicacidtriggersthe“acidcrash”ofacetone-butanol-ethanol
butanolproductionbyclostridium-acetobutylicum.JIndMicrobiol3(1):49–55
fermentationbyclostridiumacetobutylicum.ApplEnvironMicrob
CostaJM,MoreiraAR(1983)Growth-inhibitionkineticsfortheacetone-butanol 77(5):1674–1680
fermentation.AcsSymSer207:501–512
WelchRW,RudolphFB,PapoutsakisET(1989)Purificationandcharacterizationof
FondO,MattaammouriG,PetitdemangeH,EngasserJM(1985)Theroleofacids
thenadh-dependentbutanoldehydrogenasefromclostridium-
ontheproductionofacetoneandbutanolbyclostridium-acetobutylicum. acetobutylicum(atcc824).ArchBiochemBiophys273(2):309–318
ApplMicrobiolBiot22(3):195–200
YuEKC,SaddlerJN(1983)Enhancedacetone-butanolfermentationby
GeorgeHA,ChenJS(1983)AcidicconditionsAreNotobligatoryforonsetof
clostridium-acetobutylicumgrownonD-xyloseinthepresenceofaceticor
butanolformationbyclostridium-beijerinckii(synonym,clostridium- butyric-acid.FEMSMicrobiolLett18(1–2):103–107
butylicum).ApplEnvironMicrob46(2):321–327
ZverlovVV,BerezinaO,VelikodvorskayaGA,SchwarzWH(2006)Bacterialacetone
HessG(2006)BPanddupontplan‘biobutanol’.ChemEngNews84(26):9
andbutanolproductionbyindustrialfermentationinthesovietunion:use
HoltRA,StephensGM,MorrisJG(1984)Productionofsolventsbyclostridium-
ofhydrolyzedagriculturalwasteforbiorefinery.ApplMicrobiolBiot
acetobutylicumculturesmaintainedatneutralpH.ApplEnvironMicrob 71(5):587–597
48(6):1166–1170
HuangL,ForsbergCW,GibbinsLN(1986)InfluenceofexternalpHand
doi:10.1186/2191-0855-3-3
fermentationproductsonclostridium-acetobutylicumintracellularpHand Citethisarticleas:Yangetal.:AcomparisonofthreepHcontrol
cellular-distributionoffermentationproducts.ApplEnvironMicrob
methodsforrevealingeffectsofundissociatedbutyricacidonspecific
51(6):1230–1234 butanolproductionrateinbatchfermentationofClostridium
HuangLP,JinB,LantP,ZhouJT(2005)Simultaneoussaccharificationand acetobutylicum.AMBExpress20133:3.
fermentationofpotatostarchwastewatertolacticacidbyrhizopusoryzae
andrhizopusarrhizus.BiochemEngJ23(3):265–276
HusemannMHW,PapoutsakisET(1988)Solventogenesisinclostridium-
acetobutylicumfermentationsrelatedtocarboxylic-acidandproton
concentrations.BiotechnolBioeng32(7):843–852
HusemannMHW,PapoutsakisET(1989)Enzymeslimitingbutanolandacetone
formationincontinuousandbatchculturesofclostridium-acetobutylicum.
ApplMicrobiolBiot31(5–6):435–444