Preliminary Optimization of Fermentation Process for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by an Adaptive Evolution-Derived Strain of Aurantiochytrium limacinum
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Microbial Strain, Inoculum Preparation, and Cultivation Medium
2.2. Cassava Starch Hydrolysate Preparation
2.3. Shake-Flask Culture
2.3.1. Investigation of Growth and DHA Production of A. limacinum BBF002 on Various Carbon Sources
2.3.2. Investigation of Growth and DHA Production of BBF002 on Various Nitrogen Sources
2.3.3. Investigation of Growth and DHA Production of BBF002 on Various Carbon-to-Nitrogen (C/N) Ratios
2.3.4. Investigation of Growth and DHA Production of BBF002 from Cassava Starch Hydrolysate
2.4. Laboratory-Scale Bioreactor Culture
2.5. Analytical Methods
2.6. Data Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Growth and DHA Production of BBF002 in Shake Flasks
3.1.1. Effect of Different Carbon Sources
3.1.2. Effect of Different Nitrogen Sources
3.1.3. Effect of Various C/N Ratios
3.1.4. Growth and DHA Production from Cassava Starch Hydrolysate (CSH) as a Carbon Source at Low and High C/N Ratios
3.2. Growth and DHA Production of A. limacinum in a 5 L Bioreactor
3.2.1. Effect of Different Agitation Speeds, Aeration Rates, and Types of Sparger and Impeller
3.2.2. Effect of Initial Glucose Concentration
3.2.3. Intermittent Fed-Batch Fermentation by BBF002 from CSH
4. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Swanson, D.; Block, R.; Mousa, S.A. Omega-3 Fatty Acids EPA and DHA: Health Benefits Throughout Life. Adv. Nutr. 2012, 3, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shahidi, F.; Ambigaipalan, P. Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids and Their Health Benefits. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 9, 345–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adarme-Vega, T.C.; Thomas-Hall, S.R.; Schenk, P.M. Towards Sustainable Sources for Omega-3 Fatty Acids Production. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2014, 26, 14–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Barclay, W.R.; Meager, K.M.; Abril, J.R. Heterotrophic Production of Long Chain Omega-3 Fatty Acids Utilizing Algae and Algae-like Microorganisms. J. Appl. Phycol. 1994, 6, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shafaghat, Z.; Najafi, F.; Khavari-Nejad, R.-A.; Mohammadi, M.; Tahmasebi Enferadi, S. Growth Dynamics and Lipid Metabolism of Aurantiochytrium sp.: Insights into Its Potential Applications. Aquat. Ecol. 2024, 58, 789–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ratledge, C. Microbial Oils: An Introductory Overview of Current Status and future Prospects. OCL 2013, 20, D602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barclay, W.; Weaver, C.; Metz, J.; Hansen, J. 4—Development of a Docosahexaenoic Acid Production Technology Using Schizochytrium: Historical Perspective and Update. In Single Cell Oils, 2nd ed.; Cohen, Z., Ratledge, C., Eds.; AOCS Press: Urbana, IL, USA, 2010; pp. 75–96. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, M.; Song, X.; Feng, Y.; Li, W.; Cui, Q. Isolation and Characterization of Aurantiochytrium Species: High Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production by the Newly Isolated Microalga, Aurantiochytrium sp. SD116. J. Oleo Sci. 2013, 62, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Tang, J.; Li, J.; Daroch, M.; Cheng, J.J. Efficient Production of Triacylglycerols Rich in Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) by Osmo-Heterotrophic Marine Protists. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 98, 9643–9652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Ye, H.; Sen, B.; Xie, Y.; He, Y.; Park, S.; Wang, G. Improved Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid in Batch Fermentation by Newly-Isolated Strains of Schizochytrium sp. and Thraustochytriidae sp. through Bioprocess Optimization. Synth. Syst. Biotechnol. 2018, 3, 121–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhu, L.; Zhang, X.; Ren, X.; Zhu, Q. Effects of Culture Conditions on Growth and Docosahexaenoic Acid Production from Schizochytrium limacinum. J. Ocean Univ. China 2008, 7, 83–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rampai, T.; Nopgasorn, R.; Laoteng, K.; Wannawilai, S. Adaptive Evolution of Aurantiochytrium limacinum for Efficient Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid Under Acidic and High-Temperature Conditions. Microorganisms 2025, 13, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, L.; Zhu, X.; Ye, H.; Wen, Y.; Sen, B.; Wang, G. Low Dissolved Oxygen Supply Functions as a Global Regulator of the Growth and Metabolism of Aurantiochytrium sp. PKU#Mn16 in the Early Stages of Docosahexaenoic Acid Fermentation. Microb. Cell Fact. 2023, 22, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manikan, V.; Kalil, M.S.; Hamid, A.A. Response Surface Optimization of Culture Medium for Enhanced Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by a Malaysian Thraustochytrid. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 8611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, T.Y.; Lu, W.C.; Chu, I.M. A Fermentation Strategy for Producing Docosahexaenoic Acid in Aurantiochytrium limacinum SR21 and Increasing C22:6 Proportions in Total Fatty Acid. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 123, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nazir, Y.; Shuib, S.; Kalil, M.S.; Song, Y.; Hamid, A.A. Optimization of Culture Conditions for Enhanced Growth, Lipid and Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production of Aurantiochytrium SW1 by Response Surface Methodology. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aini, U.N.; Lunprom, S.; Reungsang, A.; Salakkam, A. Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production by Aurantiochytrium limacinum Using Cassava Pulp Hydrolysate as an Alternative Low-Cost Carbon Source. Front. Mar. Sci. 2022, 9, 985119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, X.; Zang, X.; Zhang, X. Production of High Docosahexaenoic Acid by Schizochytrium sp. Using Low-Cost Raw Materials from Food Industry. J. Oleo Sci. 2015, 64, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, A.; Liefeldt, S.; Rova, U.; Christakopoulos, P.; Matsakas, L. Co-Production of DHA and Squalene by Thraustochytrid from Forest Biomass. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soumya, M.P.; Sasikumar, K.; Pandey, A.; Nampoothiri, K.M. Cassava Starch Hydrolysate as Sustainable Carbon Source for Exopolysaccharide Production by Lactobacillus Plantarum. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2019, 6, 85–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, A.; Zhang, X.; Wei, D.; Chen, G.; Wu, Q.; Yang, S.T. Effects of Cassava Starch Hydrolysate on Cell Growth and Lipid Accumulation of the Heterotrophic Microalgae Chlorella protothecoides. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2009, 36, 1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghani, R.S.M.; Lee, M.D.; Razali, S.M. A Comprehensive Review of Sustainable Benefit of Cassava Starch and Its Potential in Wood-Based and Lignocellulosic Materials. JETIA 2023, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Unban, K.; Puangkhankham, N.; Kanpiengjai, A.; Govindarajan, R.K.; Kalaimurugan, D.; Khanongnuch, C. Improvement of Polymer Grade L-Lactic Acid Production Using Lactobacillus rhamnosus SCJ9 from Low-Grade Cassava Chips by Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation. Processes 2020, 8, 1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lépiz-Aguilar, L. Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol (ABE) Production in Fermentation of Enzymatically Hydrolyzed Cassava Flour by Clostridium beijerinckii BA101 and Solvent Separation. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2013, 23, 1092–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McNeil, B.; Harvey, L.M. Fermentation: A Practical Approach; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Lepage, G.; Roy, C.C. Improved Recovery of Fatty Acid through Direct Transesterification without Prior Extraction or Purification. J. Lipid Res. 1984, 25, 1391–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schiefelbein, S.; Fröhlich, A.; John, G.T.; Beutler, F.; Wittmann, C.; Becker, J. Oxygen Supply in Disposable Shake-Flasks: Prediction of Oxygen Transfer Rate, Oxygen Saturation and Maximum Cell Concentration during Aerobic Growth. Biotechnol. Lett. 2013, 35, 1223–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aguiar, W.B.; Faria, L.F.F.; Couto, M.A.P.G.; Araujo, O.Q.F.; Pereira, N. Growth Model and Prediction of Oxygen Transfer Rate for Xylitol Production from D-Xylose by C. guilliermondii. Biochem. Eng. J. 2002, 12, 49–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chatdumrong, W.; Yongmanitchai, W.; Limtong, S.; Worawattanamateekul, W. Optimization of Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production and Improvement of Astaxanthin Content in a Mutant Schizochytrium limacinum Isolated from Mangrove Forest in Thailand. Kasetsart J. Nat. Sci. 2007, 41, 324–334. [Google Scholar]
- Abad, S.; Turon, X. Biotechnological Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid Using Aurantiochytrium limacinum: Carbon Sources Comparison And Growth Characterization. Mar. Drugs 2015, 13, 7275–7284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, J.; Fu, Z.; Zhu, Y.; He, J.; Ma, L.; Bu, D. Enhancing Docosahexaenoic Acid Production of Schizochytrium sp. by Optimizing Fermentation Using Central Composite Design. BMC Biotechnol. 2022, 22, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Liu, R.; Chang, G.; Li, X.; Chang, M.; Liu, Y.; Jin, Q.; Wang, X. A Strategy for the Highly Efficient Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid by Aurantiochytrium limacinum SR21 Using Glucose and Glycerol as the Mixed Carbon Sources. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 177, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.; Liu, L.; Zhu, X.; Li, Q.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, X.; Xie, N.; Wang, G. Different Nitrogen Sources Influence Docosahexaenoic Acid Biosynthesis in Marine Heterotrophic Protist Aurantiochytrium sp. PKU#SW8 by Modulating Central Metabolic Pathways. Bioresour. Technol. 2025, 436, 132951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, J.; Gao, Z.; Zhang, C.; Chen, M. Regulation of Lipid Accumulation in Schizochytrium sp. ATCC 20888 in Response to Different Nitrogen Sources. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2017, 119, 1700025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pahlavanyali, M.; Jalili, H.; Noroozi, M.; Moradi, Y.; Hallajisani, A. The Effect of Temperature and Different Carbon and Nitrogen Sources on the Growth and Fatty Acid Profile of a Newly Isolated Microorganism Aurantiochytrium sp. Strain SHY. Iran. J. Fish. Sci. 2020, 19, 3112–3126. [Google Scholar]
- Humhal, T.; Kronusova, O.; Kaštánek, P.; Potočár, T.; Kohoutková, J.; Brányik, T. Influence of Nitrogen Sources on Growth of Thraustochytrids in Waste Water from the Demineralization of Cheese Whey. Czech J. Food Sci. 2019, 37, 383–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, S.T.; Yu, S.T.; Lin, L.P. Effect of Culture Conditions on Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Schizochytrium sp. S31. Process Biochem. 2005, 40, 3103–3108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.; He, Y.; Ye, H.; Xie, Y.; Sen, B.; Jiao, N.; Wang, G. Different Carbon and Nitrogen Sources Regulated Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production of Thraustochytriidae sp. PKU#SW8 through a Fully Functional Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid (PUFA) Synthase Gene (PfaB). Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 318, 124273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, A.; Pruthi, V.; Pruthi, P.A. Synchronized Nutrient Stress Conditions Trigger the Diversion of CDP-DG Pathway of Phospholipids Synthesis towards de Novo TAG Synthesis in Oleaginous Yeast Escalating Biodiesel Production. Energy 2017, 139, 962–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heggeset, T.M.B.; Ertesvåg, H.; Liu, B.; Ellingsen, T.E.; Vadstein, O.; Aasen, I.M. Lipid and DHA-Production in Aurantiochytrium sp.—Responses to Nitrogen Starvation and Oxygen Limitation Revealed by Analyses of Production Kinetics and Global Transcriptomes. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 19470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, L.; Ren, X.; Zhang, F.; Shi, A.; Zhai, Y.; Chen, W.; Duan, Y.; Shi, P.; Chen, L.; Li, D. Enhanced Fermentation Process for Production of High Docosahexaenoic Acid Content by Schizochytrium sp. GCD2032. Fermentation 2024, 10, 460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, X.-J.; Yu, Z.-Q.; Liu, Y.-L.; Sun, J.; Zheng, J.-Y.; Wang, Z. Utilization of High-Fructose Corn Syrup for Biomass Production Containing High Levels of Docosahexaenoic Acid by a Newly Isolated Aurantiochytrium sp. YLH70. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2015, 177, 1229–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, X.; He, Y.; Liu, L.; Zhu, X.; Sen, B.; Wang, G. Nitrogen Starvation Enhances the Production of Saturated and Unsaturated Fatty Acids in Aurantiochytrium sp. PKU#SW8 by Regulating Key Biosynthetic Genes. Mar. Drugs 2022, 20, 621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ratledge, C. Fatty Acid Biosynthesis in Microorganisms Being Used for Single Cell Oil Production. Biochimie 2004, 86, 807–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yin, F.; Sun, X.; Luo, X.; Zheng, W.; Yin, L.; Zhang, Y.; Fu, Y. A Review on Marine Microbial Docosahexaenoic Acid Production Through Circular Economy, Fermentation Engineering, and Antioxidant Technology. Mar. Drugs 2025, 23, 256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metz, J.G.; Roessler, P.; Facciotti, D.; Levering, C.; Dittrich, F.; Lassner, M.; Valentine, R.; Lardizabal, K.; Domergue, F.; Yamada, A.; et al. Production of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids by Polyketide Synthases in Both Prokaryotes and Eukaryotes. Science 2001, 293, 290–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, L.; Ji, X.J.; Ren, L.J.; Nie, Z.K.; Feng, Y.; Wu, W.J.; Ouyang, P.K.; Huang, H. Enhancement of Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Schizochytrium sp. Using a Two-stage Oxygen Supply Control Strategy Based on Oxygen Transfer Coefficient. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 52, 22–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Qu, L.; Ren, L.J.; Huang, H. Scale-up of Docosahexaenoic Acid Production in Fed-Batch Fermentation by Schizochytrium sp. Based on Volumetric Oxygen-Transfer Coefficient. Biochem. Eng. J. 2013, 77, 82–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosa, S.M.; Soria, M.A.; Vélez, C.G.; Galvagno, M.A. Improvement of a Two-Stage Fermentation Process for Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Aurantiochytrium limacinum SR21 Applying Statistical Experimental Designs and Data Analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 2367–2374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, X.; Zhang, X.; Kuang, C.; Zhu, L.; Guo, N. Optimization of Fermentation Parameters for the Biomass and DHA Production of Schizochytrium limacinum OUC88 Using Response Surface Methodology. Process Biochem. 2007, 42, 1391–1397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Wu, W.; Guo, X.; Weichen, Y.; Qi, F.; Jiang, X.; Huang, J. Mathematical Modeling of Fed-Batch Fermentation of Schizochytrium sp. FJU-512 Growth and DHA Production Using a Shift Control Strategy. 3 Biotech 2018, 8, 162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.Y.; Yang, Y.T. Combining Engineering Strategies and Fermentation Technology to Enhance Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) Production from an Indigenous Thraustochytrium sp. BM2 Strain. Biochem. Eng. J. 2018, 133, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, D.S.; Ji, X.J.; Ren, L.J.; Li, G.L.; Sun, X.M.; Chen, K.Q.; Gao, S.; Huang, H. Development of a Scale-up Strategy for Fermentative Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid by Schizochytrium sp. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2018, 176, 600–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yokochi, T.; Honda, D.; Higashihara, T.; Nakahara, T. Optimization of Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Schizochytrium limacinum SR21. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1998, 49, 72–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, M.K.M.; Tsui, C.K.M.; Au, D.W.T.; Vrijmoed, L.L.P. Docosahexaenoic Acid Production and Ultrastructure of the Thraustochytrid Aurantiochytrium mangrovei MP2 under High Glucose Concentrations. Mycoscience 2008, 49, 266–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, B.; Li, Y.; Mbifile, M.D.; Li, C.; Yang, H.; Wang, W. Improvement of Docosahexaenoic Acid Fermentation from Schizochytrium sp. AB-610 by Staged PH Control Based on Cell Morphological Changes. Eng. Life Sci. 2017, 17, 981–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ren, L.J.; Ji, X.J.; Huang, H.; Qu, L.; Feng, Y.; Tong, Q.Q.; Ouyang, P.K. Development of a Stepwise Aeration Control Strategy for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Schizochytrium sp. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 87, 1649–1656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ye, H.; He, Y.; Xie, Y.; Sen, B.; Wang, G. Fed-Batch Fermentation of Mixed Carbon Source Significantly Enhances the Production of Docosahexaenoic Acid in Thraustochytriidae sp. PKU#Mn16 by Differentially Regulating Fatty Acids Biosynthetic Pathways. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 297, 122402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]







| Kinetic Parameters | C/N 3 | C/N 6 | C/N 12 | C/N 24 | C/N 48 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DCW (CX) (g/L) | 16.225 ± 0.000 AB | 17.625 ± 0.318 A | 14.600 ± 0.566 C | 14.950 ± 0.566 BC | 11.500 ± 0.919 D |
| DHA titer (CDHA) (g/L) | 0.746 ± 0.000 C | 1.383 ± 0.134 A | 1.186 ± 0.033 AB | 1.385 ± 0.153 A | 1.092 ± 0.000 B |
| TFA titer (CTFA) (g/L) | 1.494 ± 0.013 C | 3.404 ± 0.316 B | 3.378 ± 0.080 B | 4.586 ± 0.851 A | 4.249 ± 0.000 AB |
| Volumetric rate of biomass production (QX) (g/L d) | 5.008 ± 0.007 AB | 5.467 ± 0.099 A | 4.458 ± 0.181 C | 4.575 ± 0.196 BC | 3.425 ± 0.313 D |
| Volumetric rate of glucose consumption (QS) (g/L d) | 7.993 ± 0.119 D | 10.458 ± 0.151 C | 10.264 ± 0.259 C | 13.350 ± 0.280 A | 11.475 ± 0.077 B |
| Volumetric rate of DHA production (QDHA) (g/L d) | 0.249 ± 0.000 C | 0.461 ± 0.045 A | 0.395 ± 0.011 AB | 0.462 ± 0.051 A | 0.364 ± 0.000 B |
| Volumetric rate of TFA production (QTFA) (g/L d) | 0.498 ± 0.004 C | 1.135 ± 0.105 B | 1.126 ± 0.027 B | 1.529 ± 0.284 A | 1.416 ± 0.000 AB |
| Specific growth rates (μ) (d–1) | 0.573 ± 0.002 AB | 0.580 ± 0.000 A | 0.563 ± 0.002 B | 0.566 ± 0.005 B | 0.538 ± 0.011 C |
| Biomass yield from substrate (YX/S) (g/g) | 0.627 ± 0.008 A | 0.523 ± 0.017 B | 0.435 ± 0.029 C | 0.343 ± 0.022 D | 0.299 ± 0.029 D |
| DHA yield from substrate (YDHA/S) (g/g) | 0.031 ± 0.000 C | 0.044 ± 0.005 A | 0.039 ± 0.000 AB | 0.035 ± 0.003 BC | 0.032 ± 0.000 BC |
| TFA yield from substrate (YTFA/S) (g/g) | 0.062 ± 0.000 B | 0.109 ± 0.012 A | 0.110 ± 0.000 A | 0.114 ± 0.019 A | 0.123 ± 0.001 A |
| DHA content (DHA in DCW, % w/w) | 4.592 ± 0.001 C | 7.845 ± 0.761 B | 8.126 ± 0.226 B | 9.989 ± 0.000 A | 9.493 ± 0.000 A |
| TFA content (TFA in DCW, % w/w) | 9.192 ± 0.078 E | 19.313 ± 1.793 D | 23.140 ± 0.548 C | 34.700 ± 0.000 B | 36.946 ± 0.000 A |
| DHA proportion (DHA in TFA, % w/w) | 49.952 ± 0.410 A | 40.614 ± 0.169 B | 35.116 ± 0.143 C | 30.427 ± 2.320 D | 25.694 ± 0.000 E |
| Sparger | Impeller | DCW (g/L) | DHA Titer (g/L) | TFA Titer (g/L) | DHA Content (DHA in DCW, %w/w) | TFA Content (TFA in DCW, %w/w) | DHA Proportion (DHA in TFA, % w/w) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ring | Rushton | 11.425 ± 0.233 | 0.303 ± 0.026 | 0.561 ± 0.047 | 2.654 ± 0.230 | 4.909 ± 0.413 | 54.072 ± 0.144 |
| Ring | Pitch-blade | 18.60 ± 0.283 | 0.659 ± 0.023 | 1.367 ± 0.047 | 3.545 ± 0.121 | 7.349 ± 0.253 | 48.244 ± 0.012 |
| Micro | Pitch-blade | 6.825 ± 0.318 | 0.217 ± 0.000 | 0.526 ± 0.000 | 3.177 ± 0.001 | 7.708 ± 0.001 | 41.210 ± 0.001 |
| Kinetic Parameters | C/N 6 | C/N 24 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glucose 40 g/L | Glucose 40 g/L | Glucose 60 g/L | Glucose 80 g/L | |
| Cultivation time (d) | 0−4 | 0−4 | 0−4 | 0−11 |
| DCW (CX) (g/L) | 17.700 ± 0.636 C | 18.850 ± 0.071 C | 25.075 ± 0.177 B | 43.954 ± 1.338 A |
| DHA titer (CDHA) (g/L) | 0.578 ± 0.058 D | 2.004 ± 0.007 C | 2.541 ± 0.019 B | 3.297 ± 0.096 A |
| TFA titer (CTFA) (g/L) | 1.188 ± 0.175 C | 6.644 ± 0.005 B | 7.029 ± 0.048 B | 10.523 ± 0.310 A |
| Volumetric rate of biomass production (QX) (g/L d) | 3.538 ± 0.247 C | 4.175 ± 0.018 B | 5.872 ± 0.004 A | 3.819 ± 0.122 BC |
| Volumetric rate of substrate consumption (QS) (g/L d) | 6.971 ± 0.101 C | 11.222 ± 0.039 A | 10.728 ± 0.051 B | 6.724 ± 0.155 C |
| Volumetric rate of DHA production (QDHA) (g/L d) | 0.144 ± 0.021 D | 0.501 ± 0.002 B | 0.635 ± 0.005 A | 0.300 ± 0.009 C |
| Volumetric rate of TFA production (QTFA) (g/L d) | 0.297 ± 0.044 D | 1.661 ± 0.001 B | 1.757 ± 0.012 A | 0.957 ± 0.028 C |
| Specific growth rates (μ) (d−1) | 0.333 ± 0.019 C | 0.398 ± 0.000 B | 0.440 ± 0.005 A | 0.166 ± 0.000 D |
| Biomass yield from substrate (YX/S) (g/g) | 0.507 ± 0.028 B | 0.372 ± 0.000 C | 0.547 ± 0.003 AB | 0.568 ± 0.031 A |
| DHA yield from substrate (YDHA/S) (g/g) | 0.021 ± 0.003 C | 0.045 ± 0.000 B | 0.059 ± 0.001 A | 0.045 ± 0.002 B |
| TFA yield from substrate (YTFA/S) (g/g) | 0.043 ± 0.006 C | 0.148 ± 0.001 B | 0.164 ± 0.002 A | 0.142 ± 0.007 B |
| DHA content (DHA in DCW, % w/w) | 3.265 ± 0.478 C | 10.632 ± 0.039 A | 10.132 ± 0.075 A | 7.502 ± 0.218 B |
| TFA content (TFA in DCW, % w/w) | 6.713 ± 0.987 D | 35.246 ± 0.028 A | 28.032 ± 0.190 B | 23.941 ± 0.706 C |
| DHA proportion (DHA in TFA, % w/w) | 48.631 ± 0.021 A | 30.164 ± 0.087 D | 36.143 ± 0.021 B | 31.334 ± 0.015 C |
| Kinetic Parameters | Batch * | Fed-Batch ** |
|---|---|---|
| DCW (CX) (g/L) | 26.725 ± 0.318 | 28.150 ± 0.424 |
| DHA titer (CDHA) (g/L) | 1.718 ± 0.000 | 3.009 ± 0.000 |
| TFA titer (CTFA) (g/L) | 5.079 ± 0.000 | 9.677 ± 0.000 |
| Volumetric rate of biomass production (QX) (g/L d) | 5.363 ± 0.035 | 1.783 ± 0.306 |
| Volumetric rate of substrate consumption (QS) (g/L d) | 10.114 ± 0.123 | 5.007 ± 0.207 |
| Volumetric rate of DHA production (QDHA) (g/L d) | 0.429 ± 0.000 | 0.517 ± 0.072 |
| Volumetric rate of TFA production (QTFA) (g/L d) | 1.270 ± 0.000 | 1.665 ± 0.229 |
| Specific growth rates (μ) (d−1) | 0.335 ± 0.003 | 0.070 ± 0.014 |
| Biomass yield from substrate (YX/S) (g/g) | 0.530 ± 0.003 | 0.355 ± 0.046 |
| DHA yield from substrate (YDHA/S) (g/g) | 0.042 ± 0.001 | 0.104 ± 0.019 |
| TFA yield from substrate (YTFA/S) (g/g) | 0.126 ± 0.002 | 0.334 ± 0.060 |
| DHA content (DHA in DCW, % w/w) | 6.428 ± 0.000 | 10.689 ± 0.000 |
| TFA content (TFA in DCW, % w/w) | 19.003 ± 0.000 | 34.378 ± 0.000 |
| DHA proportion (DHA in TFA, % w/w) | 33.825 ± 0.000 | 31.094 ± 0.000 |
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
Nopgason, R.; Rampai, T.; Dechpreechakul, T.; Laoteng, K.; Wannawilai, S. Preliminary Optimization of Fermentation Process for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by an Adaptive Evolution-Derived Strain of Aurantiochytrium limacinum. Fermentation 2026, 12, 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation12040207
Nopgason R, Rampai T, Dechpreechakul T, Laoteng K, Wannawilai S. Preliminary Optimization of Fermentation Process for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by an Adaptive Evolution-Derived Strain of Aurantiochytrium limacinum. Fermentation. 2026; 12(4):207. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation12040207
Chicago/Turabian StyleNopgason, Rujirek, Tanapawarin Rampai, Thanaporn Dechpreechakul, Kobkul Laoteng, and Siwaporn Wannawilai. 2026. "Preliminary Optimization of Fermentation Process for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by an Adaptive Evolution-Derived Strain of Aurantiochytrium limacinum" Fermentation 12, no. 4: 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation12040207
APA StyleNopgason, R., Rampai, T., Dechpreechakul, T., Laoteng, K., & Wannawilai, S. (2026). Preliminary Optimization of Fermentation Process for Efficient Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by an Adaptive Evolution-Derived Strain of Aurantiochytrium limacinum. Fermentation, 12(4), 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation12040207

