Submitted:
15 February 2024
Posted:
19 February 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Strain and Cultivation
2.2. Fermentation Process
2.3. Analytical Method for SA
2.4. Effects of Fermentation Conditions on SA Yield
2.5. Effects of Carbon and Nitrogen Sources on SA Yield
2.6. Determination of Central Values for Response Surface Design
2.7. Response Surface Methodology for Optimization of Medium Compositions
2.8. Experimental Data Processing
2.9. Verification Experiments
3. Results
3.1. Effects of Fermentation Conditions on SA yield
3.1.1. Effect of Fermentation Time on SA Production
3.1.2. Effect of Temperature on SA Production
3.1.3. Effect of Initial pH on SA Production
3.1.4. Effect of Seed Age on SA Production
3.1.5. Effect of Inoculum Size on SA Production
3.1.6. Effect of Loading Volume on SA Production
3.1.7. Effect of Concentration of Sea Salt on SA Production
3.2. Effect of Carbon and Nitrogen Sources on SA Production
3.3. Central Values Analysis
3.4. Response Surface Methodology Analysis
3.5. Verification Experiment
4. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Gangadevi, V.; Muthumary, J. Taxol, an anticancer drug produced by an endophytic fungus Bartalinia robillardoides Tassi, isolated from a medicinal plant, Aegle marmelos Correa ex Roxb. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2007, 24, 717–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gangadevi, V.; Muthumary, J. A novel endophytic Taxol-producing fungus Chaetomella raphigera isolated from a medicinal plant, Terminalia arjuna. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2009, 158, 675–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toghueo, R.M.K. Bioprospecting endophytic fungi from Fusarium genus as sources of bioactive metabolites. Mycology 2020, 11, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Yu, R.; Bai, X.; Wang, H.; Zhang, H. Fusarium: a treasure trove of bioactive secondary metabolites. Nat Prod Rep 2020, 37, 1568–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Gu, W.; Lo, D.; Ding, X.Z.; Ujiki, M.; Adrian, T.E.; Soff, G.A.; Silverman, R.B. N-methylsansalvamide a peptide analogues. Potent new antitumor agents. J Med Chem 2005, 48, 3630–3638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belofsky, G.N.; Jensen, P.R.; Fenical, W. Sansalvamide: A new cytotoxic cyclic depsipeptide produced by a marine fungus of the genus Fusarium. Tetrahedron Letters 1999, 40, 2913–2916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cueto, M.; Jensen, P.R.; Fenical, W. N-methylsansalvamide, a cytotoxic cyclic depsipeptide from a marine fungus of the genus Fusarium. Phytochemistry 2000, 55, 223–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Moon, S.K.; Lee, C. N-methylsansalvamide elicits antitumor effects in colon cancer cells in vitro and in vivo by regulating proliferation, apoptosis, and metastatic capacity. Front Pharmacol 2023, 14, 1146966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kheiralla, Z.H.; El-Gendy, N.S.; Ahmed, H.A.; Shaltout, T.H.; Hussein, M.M.D. One-factor-at-a-time (OFAT) optimization of hemicellulases production from Fusarium moniliformein submerged fermentation. Energ Source Part A 2018, 40, 1877–1885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, F.Z.; Zheng, H.R.; Cheng, Y.W.; Song, S.; Zheng, Z.X.; Jia, S. Medium optimization for epsilon-poly-L-lysine production by Streptomyces diastatochromogenes using response surface methodology. Lett Appl Microbiol 2018, 66, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.Y.; Xu, M.J.; Tang, Y.Q.; Shao, Y.L.; Wang, H.; Zhang, H.W. Genome features and antiSMASH analysis of an endophytic strain Fusarium sp. R1. Metabolites 2022, 12, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, L.; Xie, J.; Chen, X.; Tao, X.; Xie, J.; Shi, X.; Huang, Z. Comparative transcriptome analysis of Monascus purpureus at different fermentation times revealed candidate genes involved in exopolysaccharide biosynthesis. Food Res Int 2022, 160, 111700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daniel, R.M.; Danson, M.J. Temperature and the catalytic activity of enzymes: a fresh understanding. FEBS Lett 2013, 587, 2738–2743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, X.; Chu, X.; Du, B.; Huang, C.; Xie, C.; Zhang, Z.; Jiang, L. Functional characterization of a novel violacein biosynthesis operon from Janthinobacterium sp. B9-8. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2022, 106, 2903–2916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Li, X.; Zhao, X.; Li, Y. Factors affecting the efficiency of a bioelectrochemical system: a review. RSC Adv 2019, 9, 19748–19761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Long, R.; Yang, W.; Huang, G. Optimization of fermentation conditions for the production of epothilone B. Chem Biol Drug Des 2020, 96, 768–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, V.; Ahluwalia, V.; Saran, S.; Kumar, J.; Patel, A.K.; Singhania, R.R. Recent developments on solid-state fermentation for production of microbial secondary metabolites: Challenges and solutions. Bioresour Technol 2021, 323, 124566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hammarlund, E.U.; Flashman, E.; Mohlin, S.; Licausi, F. Oxygen-sensing mechanisms across eukaryotic kingdoms and their roles in complex multicellularity. Science 2020, 370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, V.; Haque, S.; Niwas, R.; Srivastava, A.; Pasupuleti, M.; Tripathi, C.K. Strategies for fermentation medium optimization: an in-depth review. Front Microbiol 2016, 7, 2087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, H.; Li, Y.; Zhang, L.; Ding, Z.; Shi, G. Understanding and application of Bacillus nitrogen regulation: A synthetic biology perspective. J Adv Res 2023, 49, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, H.S.; Kim, E.S. Recent advances in heterologous expression of natural product biosynthetic gene clusters in Streptomyces hosts. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2021, 69, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, H.S.; Phat, C.; Nam, W.S.; Lee, C. Optimization of culture conditions of Fusarium solani for the production of neoN-methylsansalvamide. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 2014, 78, 1421–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]






| Factor | Code | Levels (g/L) | |
| -1 | 1 | ||
| Sucrose | A | 10.0 | 20.0 |
| Yeast Extract | B | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| Tryptone | C | 2.0 | 10.0 |
| Run | Sucrose (g/L) | Yeast Extract (g/L) | Tryptone (g/L) |
| 1 | 15.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 |
| 2 | 17.5 | 1.3 | 10.0 |
| 3 | 20.0 | 0.6 | 14.0 |
| 4 | 22.5 | 0.0 | 18.0 |
| 5 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 22.0 |
| Factor | Code | Levels (g/L) | ||
| -1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| Sucrose | A | 17.5 | 20.0 | 22.5 |
| Yeast Extract | B | 0.0 | 0.6 | 1.2 |
| Tryptone | C | 10.0 | 14.0 | 18.0 |
| Run | Sucrose (g/L) | Yeast Extract (g/L) | Tryptone (g/L) | SA Yield (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 252.16±47.92 |
| 2 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 166.16±36.95 |
| 3 | -1 | 1 | -1 | 117.98±7.26 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 78.42±3.37 |
| 5 | 1 | -1 | -1 | 51.87±15.95 |
| 6 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 193.20±40.28 |
| 7 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 166.16±36.95 |
| 8 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 62.70±4.22 |
| 9 | -1 | -1 | -1 | 62.72±4.30 |
| 10 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 78.46±2.78 |
| 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 127.88±12.66 |
| 12 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 252.09±20.33 |
| Code | t test | P | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sucrose | 0.51 | 0.625 | 3 |
| Yeast Extract | -0.99 | 0.352 | 2 |
| Tryptone | 4.99 | 0.001 | 1 |
| Run | Sucrose (g/L) | Yeast Extract (g/L) | Tryptone (g/L) | SA Yield (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 15.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 124.46±29.43 |
| 2 | 17.5 | 1.3 | 10.0 | 235.21±10.30 |
| 3 | 20.0 | 0.6 | 14.0 | 385.33±14.72 |
| 4 | 22.5 | 0.0 | 18.0 | 380.16±10.02 |
| 5 | 25.0 | 0.0 | 22.0 | 174.23±36.71 |
| Run | Sucrose (g/L) | Yeast Extract (g/L) | Tryptone (g/L) | SA Yield (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 466.08±40.67 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 445.36±0.75 |
| 3 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 432.88±48.14 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 515.68±21.21 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 471.36±14.85 |
| 6 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 328.08±21.44 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 517.52±18.83 |
| 8 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 484.64±11.47 |
| 9 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 367.68±27.35 |
| 10 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 364.72±24.64 |
| 11 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 488.40±5.72 |
| 12 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 524.72±7.55 |
| 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 537.36±18.32 |
| 14 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 268.00±19.87 |
| 15 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 198.88±2.78 |
| 16 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 230.96±21.64 |
| 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 517.52±28.04 |
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. |
© 2024 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).