Valorization of Corn Steep Liquor and Glycerol for Fungal Chitosan Production by Mucorales from Brazilian Biomes: Structural Characterization and Antimicrobial Activity
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. Biomass and FuCho Production by Mucorales Fungi: Screening Assay
2.2. Biomass and FuCho Production by A. caatinguensis URM 7156 and C. elegans UCP 1306: CCRD 22 Assay
2.3. Characterization of Fungal Chitosan (FuCho): Infrared Spectroscopy, X-Ray Diffraction and Thermal Analysis
2.4. Morphological Characterization of Fungal Chitosan (FuCho) Extracted from the Biomass of Absidia caatinguensis and from Cunninghamella elegans by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
2.5. Irritation Potential Assessment of Fungal Chitosan (FuCho) Extracted from the Biomass of Absidia caatinguensis and from Cunninghamella elegans Using the Hen’s Egg Test–Chorioallantoic Membrane (HET-CAM)
2.6. Determination of the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) of FuCho Extracted from the Biomass of Absidia caatinguensis and from Cunninghamella elegans
2.7. Effect of FuCho Extracted from the Biomass of Absidia caatinguensis and from Cunninghamella elegans on Bacterial Morphology and Membrane Integrity by Confocal Microscopy
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Fungal Strains and Substrate Characterization
- Caatinga Biome: Rhizopus arrhizus UCP 1295, Cunninghamella elegans UCP 1306, Syncephalastrum racemosum UCP 1302, and Cunninghamella phaeospora UCP 1303 (isolated from São José do Belmonte: , ); Absidia caatinguensis URM 7156 (Catimbau National Park, Buíque: , ); Absidia aguabelensis URM 8213 (Serra do Comunaty, Águas Belas: , ); and Lichtheimia brasiliensis URM 6910 (Araripina: , ).
- Atlantic Rainforest Biome: Backusella constricta URM 7323 (Dois Irmãos Ecological Reserve, Recife: , ) and Mucor pernambucoensis URM 7640 (Serra do Bonito, Bonito: , ).
3.2. Screening Assay and FuCho Extraction
3.3. Effects of CSL-GLY on the Production of Biomass and FuCho: CCRD 22 Design
3.4. Characterization of FuCho
3.5. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) of FuCho
3.6. Irritation Potential Test Using Chorioallantoic Membrane (HET-CAM Test)
3.7. Determination of the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC)
3.8. Effect of FuCho on Bacterial Morphology, Cell Viability and Membrane Integrity Assay
3.9. Statistical Analysis
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, J.; Lu, Y.; Wang, H. Eco polymeric materials and natural polymer. Polymers 2023, 15, 4021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Grifoll, V.; Bravo, P.; Pérez, M.N.; Pérez-Clavijo, M.; García-Castrillo, M.; Larrañaga, A.; Lizundia, E. Environmental Sustainability and Physicochemical Property Screening of Chitin and Chitin-Glucan from 22 Fungal Species. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2024, 12, 7869–7881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Alimi, B.A.; Pathania, S.; Wilson, J.; Duffy, B.; Frias, J.M.C. Extraction, quantification, characterization, and application in food packaging of chitin and chitosan from mushrooms: A review. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 237, 124195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hisham, F.; Maziati Akmal, M.H.; Ahmad, F.; Ahmad, K.; Samatm, N. Biopolymer chitosan: Potential sources, extraction methods, and emerging applications. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2024, 15, 102424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Molina-Ramírez, C.; Castro, C.; Zuluaga, R.; Gañán, P. Physical characterization of bacterial cellulose produced by Komagataeibacter medellinensis using food supply chain waste and agricultural by-products as alternative low-cost feedstocks. J. Polym. Environ. 2018, 26, 830–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Pal, P.; Singh, A.K.; Srivastava, R.K.; Rathore, S.S.; Sahoo, U.K.; Subudhi, S.; Sarangi, P.K.; Prus, P. Circular Bioeconomy in Action: Transforming Food Wastes into Renewable Food Resources. Foods 2024, 13, 3007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Roca, C.; Chagas, B.; Farinha, I.; Freitas, F.; Mafra, L.; Aguiar, F.; Oliveira, R.; Reis, M.A.M. Production of yeast chitin–glucan complex from biodiesel industry byproduct. Process Biochem. 2012, 47, 1670–1675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wang, H.; Li, H.; Lee, C.K.; Nanyan, N.S.M.; Tay, G.S. A systematic review on utilization of biodiesel-derived crude glycerol in sustainable polymers preparation. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 261, 129536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Cardoso, A.; Lins, C.I.M.; Dos Santos, E.R.; Silva, M.C.F.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Microbial Enhance of Chitosan Production by Rhizopus arrhizus Using Agroindustrial Substrates. Molecules 2012, 17, 4904–4914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Souza, A.F.; Galindo, H.M.; Lima, M.A.B.; Ribeaux, D.R.; Rodríguez, D.M.; Andrade, R.F.S.; Gusmão, N.B.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Biotechnological strategies for chitosan production by Mucoralean strains and dimorphism using renewable substrates. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 4286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Wijayawardene, N.; Hyde, K.; Dai, D.; Sánchez-García, M.; Goto, B.; Saxena, R.; Erdoğdu, M.; Selçuk, F.; Rajeshkuma, K.; Aptroot, A.; et al. Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa—2021. Mycosphere 2022, 13, 53–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Nguyen, T.T.T.; Santiago, A.L.C.M.A.; Hallsworth, J.E.; Cordeiro, T.R.L.; Voigt, K.; Kirk, P.M.; Crous, P.W.; Júnior, M.A.M.; Elsztein, C.; Lee, H.B. New Mucorales from opposite ends of the world. Stud. Mycol. 2024, 109, 273–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Berger, L.R.R.; Stamford, T.C.M.; Stamford-Arnaud, T.M.; Alcântara, S.R.C.; Silva, A.C.; Silva, A.M.; Nascimento, A.E.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Green conversion of agroindustrial wastes into chitin and chitosan by Rhizopus arrhizus and Cunninghamella elegans strains. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2014, 15, 9082–9102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Amorin, R.V.S.; Souza, W.; Fukushima, K.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Faster Chitosan Production by Mucoralean Strains in Submerged Culture. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2001, 32, 20–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Berger, L.R.R.; Araújo, M.B.; Costa, D.P.; Lima, M.A.B.; Almeida, J.W.L.; Medeiros, E.V. Agroindustrial waste as ecofriendly and low-cost alternative to production of chitosan from Mucorales fungi and antagonist effect against Fusarium solani (Mart.) Sacco and Scytalidium lignicola Pesante. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 161, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Paiva, W.S.; de Souza Neto, F.E.; Queiroz, M.F.; Batista, L.A.N.C.; Rocha, H.A.O.; Lima Batista, A.C. Oligochitosan Synthesized by Cunninghamella elegans, a Fungus from Caatinga (The Brazilian Savanna) Is a Better Antioxidant than Animal Chitosan. Molecules 2022, 27, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Stamford, T.C.M.; Stamford, T.L.M.; Stamford, N.P.; Barros Neto, B.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Growth of Cunninghamella elegans UCP 542 and production of chitin and chitosan using yam bean medium. Electron. J. Biotechnol. 2007, 10, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chagas Junior, A.F.; Chagas, L.F.; Scheidt, G.N.; Chapla, V.M.; Colonia, B.S.; Souza, M.C.; Martins, A.L. Chitosan and chitin production and extraction in isolates of Cunninghamella sp. Acta Sci. Biol. Sci. 2022, 44, e59982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Karamchandani, B.M.; Maurya, P.A.; Awale, M.; Dalvi, S.G.; Banat, I.M.; Satpute, S.K. Optimization of fungal chitosan production from Cunninghamella echinulata using statistical designs. Biotech 2024, 14, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Pochanavanich, P.; Suntornsuk, W. Fungal chitosan production and its characterization. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2002, 35, 17–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Zhang, H.; Yang, S.; Fang, Y.; Deng, Y.; Wang, D.; Zhao, Y. Optimization of the fermentation conditions of Rhizopus japonicus M193 for the production of chitin deacetylase and chitosan. Carbohydr. Polym. 2014, 101, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Abo Elsoud, M.M.; Mohamed, S.S.; Selim, M.S.; Sidkey, N.M. Characterization and optimization of chitosan production by Aspergillus terreus. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2023, 48, 93–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Singh, A.; Kumar, V.; Anand, S.; Phukan, D.; Pandey, N. Mixed organic and inorganic nitrogen sources enhance chitosan yield in novel isolates of Penicillium. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 256, 128115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Patel, H.K.; Patel, N.P.; Shah, M.P. Microbial bioprospecting of biodiesel industry-derived crude glycerol waste conversion into value-added products. In Green Approach to Alternative Fuel for a Sustainable Future; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023; Chapter 7; pp. 71–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Irbe, I.; Andze, L.; Blumfelde, M.; Filipova, I.; Verovkins, A.; Zoldners, J. Harvesting mycelial biomass of selected Basidiomycetes for chitosan biopolymer extraction. Polymers 2023, 15, 3548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Svensson, S.E.; Oliveira, A.O.; Adolfsson, K.H.; Heinmaa, I.; Root, A.; Kondori, N.; Ferreira, J.A.; Hakkarainen, M.; Zamani, A. Turning food waste to antibacterial and biocompatible fungal chitin/chitosan monofilaments. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 209, 618–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Arbia, W.; Amar, M.K.; Adour, L.; Amrane, A. Maximizing chitin and chitosan recovery yields from Fusarium verticillioides using a many-factors-at-a-time approach. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 282, 136708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Almeida, R.R.; Pinto, N.A.R.; Soares, I.C.; Clarindo Ferreira, L.B.; Lima, L.L.; Leitão, A.A.; de Lima Guimarães, L.G. Production and physicochemical properties of fungal chitosans with efficacy to inhibit mycelial growth activity of pathogenic fungi. Carbohydr. Res. 2023, 525, 108762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Erdoğmuş, S.F.; Altıntaş, Ö.E.; Çelik, S. Production of fungal chitosan and fabrication of fungal chitosan/polycaprolactone electrospun nanofibers for tissue engineering. Microsc. Res. Tech. 2023, 86, 1309–1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gouvea, H.L.; da Rocha, M.; Oreste, E.Q.; Barbosa, S.C.; Kupski, L.; Primel, E.G. Sustainable Production of Bioactive Chitosan from Fermented Rice Bran and Husk via Solid-State Fermentation. Fermentation 2026, 12, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Silva, A.F.S.; Souza, A.F.; Pinheiro, I.O.; Campos-Takaki, G.M. Fungal production of chitin and chitosan using agro-industrial residues as sustainable sources of carbon and nitrogen. Braz. J. Dev. 2022, 8, 3562–3573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Koirala, P.; Bhandari, Y.; Khadka, A.; Kumar, S.R.; Nirmal, N.P. Nanochitosan from crustacean and mollusk byproduct: Extraction, characterization, and applications in the food industry. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 262, 130008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kadak, A.E.; Küçükgülmez, A.; Çelik, M. Preparation and characterization of crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus) chitosan with different deacetylation degrees. Iran J. Biotechnol. 2023, 21, e3253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Claverie, E.; Perini, M.; Onderwater, R.C.A.; Pianezze, S.; Larcher, R.; Roosa, S.; Yada, B.; Wattiez, R. Multiple technology approach based on stable isotope ratio analysis, fourier transform infrared spectrometry and thermogravimetric analysis to ensure the fungal origin of the chitosan. Molecules 2023, 28, 4324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Moreno-Vásquez, M.J.; Valenzuela-Buitimea, E.L.; Plascencia-Jatomea, M.; Encinas-Encinas, J.C.; Rodríguez-Félix, F.; Sánchez-Valdes, S.; Rosas-Burgos, E.C.; Ocaño-Higuera, V.M.; Graciano-Verdugo, A.Z. Functionalization of chitosan by a free radical reaction: Characterization, antioxidant and antibacterial potential. Carbohydr. Polym. 2017, 155, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Yen, M.-T.; Yang, J.-H.; Mau, J.-L. Physicochemical characterization of chitin and chitosan from crab shells. Carbohydr. Polym. 2009, 75, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Budai, P.; Kormos, É.; Buda, I.; Somody, G.; Lehel, J. Comparative Evaluation of HET-CAM and ICE Methods for Objective Assessment of Ocular Irritation Caused by Selected Pesticide Products. Toxicol. Vitr. 2021, 74, 105150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Rivero, M.N.; Lenze, M.; Izaguirre, M.; Pérez Damonte, S.H.; Aguilar, A.; Wikinski, S.; Gutiérrez, M.L. Comparison between HET-CAM Protocols and a Product Use Clinical Study for Eye Irritation Evaluation of Personal Care Products Including Cosmetics According to Their Surfactant Composition. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2021, 153, 112229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Sanchez Armengol, E.; Grassiri, B.; Piras, A.M.; Zambito, Y.; Fabiano, A.; Laffleur, F. Ocular antibacterial chitosan-maleic acid hydrogels: In vitro and in vivo studies for a promising approach with enhanced mucoadhesion. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 254, 127939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Bagley, D.M.; Waters, D.; Kong, B.M. Development of a 10-day chorioallantoic membrane vascular assay as an alternative to the draize rabbit eye irritation test. Food Chem. Toxicol. 1994, 32, 1155–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- European Union Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EURL ECVAM). DB-ALM Method Summary No. 96: Hen’s Egg Test–Chorioallantoic Membrane (HET-CAM); European Commission: Ispra, Italy, 2013; Available online: https://jeodpp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ftp/jrc-opendata/EURL-ECVAM/datasets/DBALM/LATEST/online/ (accessed on 25 July 2026).
- Bhosale, V.A.; Srivastava, V.; Valamla, B.; Yadav, R.; Singh, S.B.; Mehra, N.K. Preparation and evaluation of modified chitosan nanoparticles using anionic sodium alginate polymer for treatment of ocular disease. Pharmaceutics 2022, 14, 2802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Czajkowska, K.; Rybicki, M.; Kłosiński, K.K.; Wach, R.A. Factors Determining the Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Chitosan: A Critical Analysis of the Impact of Molecular Weight and Degree of Deacetylation. Molecules 2026, 31, 2412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Lima, G.S.; Araújo, S.A.; Berger, L.R.R.; Fai, A.E.C.; de Lima, M.A.B.; França, R.; Stamford, T.C.M. Chitosan as an antimicrobial agent to increase shelf life of foods. In Chitosan: Novel Applications in Food Systems; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023; Chapter 5; pp. 155–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ardean, C.; Davidescu, C.M.; Nemeş, N.S.; Negrea, A.; Ciopec, M.; Duteanu, N.; Negrea, P.; Duda-Seiman, D.; Musta, V. Factors influencing the antibacterial activity of chitosan and chitosan modified by functionalization. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 7449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Ke, C.-L.; Deng, F.-S.; Chuang, C.-Y.; Lin, C.-H. Antimicrobial actions and applications of chitosan. Polymers 2021, 13, 904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gong, W.; Sun, Y.; Tu, T.; Huang, J.; Zhu, C.; Zhang, J.; Salah, M.; Zhao, L.; Xia, X.; Wang, Y. Chitosan inhibits Penicillium expansum possibly by binding to DNA and triggering apoptosis. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 259, 129113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Orellano, M.S.; Isaac, P.; Breser, M.L.; Bohl, L.P.; Conesa, A.; Falcone, R.D.; Porporatto, C. Chitosan nanoparticles enhance the antibacterial activity of the native polymer against bovine mastitis pathogens. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 213, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Hu, K.J.; Hu, J.L.; Ho, K.P.; Yeung, K.W. Screening of fungi for chitosan producers, and copper adsorption capacity of fungal chitosan and chitosanaceous materials. Carbohydr. Polym. 2004, 58, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Baxter, A.; Dillon, M.; Anthony Taylor, K.D.; Roberts, G.A.F. Improved method for i.r. determination of the degree of N-acetylation of chitosan. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 1992, 14, 166–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Oliveira, C.E.V.; Magnani, M.; Sales, C.V.; Souza Pontes, A.L.; Campos-Takaki, G.M.; Stamford, T.C.M.; Souza, E.L. Effects of chitosan from Cunninghamella elegans on virulence of post-harvest pathogenic fungi in table grapes (Vitis labrusca L.). Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2014, 171, 54–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Luepke, N.P. Hen’s egg chorioallantoic membrane test for irritation potential. Food Chem. Toxicol. 1985, 23, 287–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Steiling, W.; Bracher, M.; Courtellemont, P.; de Silva, O. The HET–CAM, a useful in vitro assay for assessing the eye irritation properties of cosmetic formulations and ingredients. Toxicol. Vitr. 1999, 13, 375–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gudiña, E.J.; Rocha, V.; Teixeira, J.A.; Rodrigues, L.R. Antimicrobial and antiadhesive properties of a biosurfactant isolated from Lactobacillus paracasei ssp. paracasei A20. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2010, 50, 419–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Xing, K.; Chen, X.G.; Kong, M.; Liu, C.S.; Cha, D.S.; Park, H.J. Effect of oleoyl-chitosan nanoparticles as a novel antibacterial dispersion system on viability, membrane permeability and cell morphology of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Carbohydr. Polym. 2009, 16, 17–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- De Sousa, J.P.; De Oliveira, K.Á.R.; De Figueiredo, R.C.B.Q.; De Souza, E.L. Influence of Carvacrol and 1,8-Cineole on Cell Viability, Membrane Integrity, and Morphology of Aeromonas hydrophila Cultivated in a Vegetable-Based Broth. J. Food Prot. 2015, 78, 424–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]








| Fungal Strains | Biomass (g/L) | FuCho (mg/g) |
|---|---|---|
| Absidia caatinguensis URM 7156 | 7.94 (±1.63) abc | 126.56 (±1.25) a |
| Cunninghamella elegans UCP 1306 | 9.03 (±1.02) ab | 92.99 (±0.87) ab |
| Backusella constricta URM 7323 | 8.47 (±1.61) abc | 63.41 (±3.08) abc |
| Syncephalastrum racemosum UCP 1302 | 10.36 (±1.01) a | 60.10 (±1.68) abc |
| Cunninghamella phaeospora UCP 1303 | 9.25 (±1.84) ab | 50.63 (±6.65) abc |
| Mucor pernambucoensis URM7640 | 6.99 (±0.37) bcd | 44.70 (±2.96) bc |
| Rhizopus arrhizus UCP 1295 | 10.61 (±1.49) a | 37.08 (±1.52) bc |
| Lichtheimia brasiliensis URM 6910 | 5.89 (±0.31) cd | 37.07 (±3.69) bc |
| Absidia aguabelensis URM 8213 | 4.17 (±0.49) d | 17.88 (±0.88) c |
| Run | CSL (%) | GLY (%) | Absidia caatinguensis | Cunninghamella elegans | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biomass (g/L) | FuCho (mg/g) | Biomass (g/L) | FuCho (mg/g) | |||
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 7.76 | 48.62 | 5.63 | 86.39 |
| 2 | 2 | 3 | 9.57 | 56.69 | 6.07 | 38.89 |
| 3 | 6 | 1 | 4.79 | 34.59 | 10.88 | 105.74 |
| 4 | 6 | 3 | 12.20 | 64.68 | 15.27 | 76.4 |
| 5 | 1.18 | 2 | 7.08 | 29.02 | 5.21 | 164.92 |
| 6 | 6.82 | 2 | 7.68 | 40.65 | 13.98 | 66.37 |
| 7 | 4 | 0.59 | 5.44 | 35.65 | 7.48 | 89.63 |
| 8 | 4 | 3.41 | 11.34 | 71.44 | 11.01 | 50.33 |
| 9 | 4 | 2 | 10.07 | 128.26 | 10.52 | 83.77 |
| 10 | 4 | 2 | 10.26 | 114.77 | 8.68 | 76.84 |
| 11 | 4 | 2 | 11.64 | 111.71 | 9.16 | 82.24 |
| 12 | 4 | 2 | 10.66 | 124.77 | 10.43 | 99.04 |
| Fungal Strains | Culture Conditions | Biomass (g/L) | FuCho (mg/g) | DD% | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cunninghamella elegans UCP 1306 | 1.18% CSL, 2% GLY, 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 5.21 | 164.92 (16.49%) | 75 | This study |
| Absidia caatinguensis URM 7156 | 4% CSL, 2% GLY, 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 10.07 | 128.26 (12.83%) | 80 | This study |
| Rhizopus arrhizus UCP 402 | 6% CSL and 13.24% Honey, 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 11.71 | 29.3 | 86 | [9] |
| Lichtheimia hyalospora UCP 1266 | 4%CSL, 6% CWW, 28 °C, 150 rpm, 120 h | 6.298 | 44.91 | 83.61 | [10] |
| Cunninghamella elegans UCP 0542 | CSL 5.0% (v/v) and molasses 2.5% (v/v), 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 13.58 | 33.13 | 80 | [13] |
| Rhizopus arrhizus UCP 0402 | CSL 2.0% (v/v) and molasses 1.0% (v/v), 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 8.25 | 49.31 | 82 | [13] |
| Mucor racemosus IFM 40781 | YPD medium (0.3% yeast extract, 1% polypeptone and 2% D-Glucose pH 4.5, 100 rpm, 28 °C, 96 h | 15.0 | 35.1 | - | [14] |
| Cunninghamella elegans URM 46109 | YPD medium (0.3% yeast extract, 1% polypeptone and 2% D-Glucose pH 4.5, 100 rpm, 28 °C, 96 h | 25.0 | 20.5 | - | [14] |
| Cunninghamella elegans UCP 1306 | 40% CAJ, 30% CW, 28 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 12.21 | 64.09 | 75 | [15] |
| Cunninghamella elegans | YPD 10 g/L, peptone 20 g/L, dextrose 20 g/L, 28 °C, 96 h in static mode | - | 20.69 | 76 | [16] |
| Cunninghamella elegans CBMAI 0843 | YPD medium, room temperature, 120 h, 100 rpm | 10.78 | 1.89% | - | [18] |
| Fusarium verticillioides FV01/07 | 3 g Arginine, 1.4 g NH4Cl, 1.5 g K2HPO4, 1.4 g FeSO4, 0.1 g NaCl, 180 rpm, 3 week | - | 72.26 | 82.43 | [27] |
| Rhizopus stolonifer | PDA, 28 °C, 100 rpm, 72 h | 5.48 | 40.59 | 85.44 | [28] |
| Rhizopus oryzae NRRL 1526 | PDB, 30 °C, 180 rpm, 6 days | 8.10 | 18.6% | 68.34 | [29] |
| Rhizopus oryzae | 5% moisture, 50% rice husk, and 1.8 g/L Urea, 30 °C, 48 h | - | 31.5% | 86.4 ± 0.6 | [30] |
| Cunninghamella elegans UCP 1306 | 2% CSL, 10% CWW, 35 °C, 150 rpm, 96 h | 3.58 | 132.42 | 80.7 | [31] |
| Microorganism | Test Substances (mg/mL) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| FuCho C. elegans | FuCho A. caatinguensis | Chlorhexidine | |
| Staphylococcus aureus | 3.0 | 2.0 | 0.48 |
| Staphylococcus epidermidis | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.48 |
| Enterococcus faecium | 5.0 | 4.0 | 0.6 |
| Streptococcus gordonii | 2.0 | 1.0 | 0.48 |
| Streptococcus oralis | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.48 |
| Streptococcus mutans | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.48 |
| Streptococcus salivarius | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.48 |
| Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.6 |
| Escherichia coli | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.6 |
| Candidakrusei | 4.0 | 3.0 | 0.24 |
| Candida albicans | 4.0 | 3.0 | 0.24 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Berger, L.R.R.; Stamford, T.C.M.; de Lima, M.A.B.; Araújo, D.S.; Farias, M.H.F.; Albuquerque, K.G.S.; Sarubbo, L.A.; Diaz De Rienzo, M.A.; Santiago, A.L.C.M.d.A.; Chinelate, G.C.B. Valorization of Corn Steep Liquor and Glycerol for Fungal Chitosan Production by Mucorales from Brazilian Biomes: Structural Characterization and Antimicrobial Activity. Molecules 2026, 31, 2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules31162807
Berger LRR, Stamford TCM, de Lima MAB, Araújo DS, Farias MHF, Albuquerque KGS, Sarubbo LA, Diaz De Rienzo MA, Santiago ALCMdA, Chinelate GCB. Valorization of Corn Steep Liquor and Glycerol for Fungal Chitosan Production by Mucorales from Brazilian Biomes: Structural Characterization and Antimicrobial Activity. Molecules. 2026; 31(16):2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules31162807
Chicago/Turabian StyleBerger, Lúcia Raquel Ramos, Thayza Christina Montenegro Stamford, Marcos Antonio B. de Lima, Danielle Silva Araújo, Mateus Henrique Freire Farias, Krause Gonçalves Silveira Albuquerque, Leonie Asfora Sarubbo, Mayri Alejandra Diaz De Rienzo, André Luiz Cabral Monteiro de Azevedo Santiago, and Gerla Castello Branco Chinelate. 2026. "Valorization of Corn Steep Liquor and Glycerol for Fungal Chitosan Production by Mucorales from Brazilian Biomes: Structural Characterization and Antimicrobial Activity" Molecules 31, no. 16: 2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules31162807
APA StyleBerger, L. R. R., Stamford, T. C. M., de Lima, M. A. B., Araújo, D. S., Farias, M. H. F., Albuquerque, K. G. S., Sarubbo, L. A., Diaz De Rienzo, M. A., Santiago, A. L. C. M. d. A., & Chinelate, G. C. B. (2026). Valorization of Corn Steep Liquor and Glycerol for Fungal Chitosan Production by Mucorales from Brazilian Biomes: Structural Characterization and Antimicrobial Activity. Molecules, 31(16), 2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules31162807

