Simultaneous enumeration of yeast and bacterial cells in the context of industrial bioprocesses

Author:

Martins Carolina Teixeira12ORCID,Jacobus Ana Paula3,Conceição Renilson2,Barbin Douglas Fernandes2,Bolini Helena2,Gombert Andreas Karoly2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Universidade de São Paulo, Programa de Pós-Graduação Interunidades em Biotecnologia, Avenida Prof. Lineu Prestes, 2415 - Edifício ICB - III, Cidade Universitária , CEP 05508-900, São Paulo, SP , Brazil

2. Faculdade de Engenharia de Alimentos, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Rua Monteiro Lobato 80 , 13083-862, Campinas, SP , Brazil

3. Instituto de Pesquisa em Bioenergia, Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” , Rua 10 2527, 13500-230, Rio Claro, SP , Brazil

Abstract

Abstract   In scenarios where yeast and bacterial cells coexist, it is of interest to simultaneously quantify the concentrations of both cell types, since traditional methods used to determine these concentrations individually take more time and resources. Here, we compared different methods for quantifying the fuel ethanol Saccharomyces cerevisiae PE-2 yeast strain and cells from the probiotic Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strain in microbial suspensions. Individual suspensions were prepared, mixed in 1:1 or 100:1 yeast-to-bacteria ratios, covering the range typically encountered in sugarcane biorefineries, and analyzed using bright field microscopy, manual and automatic Spread-plate and Drop-plate counting, flow cytometry (at 1:1 and 100:1 ratios), and a Coulter Counter (at 1:1 and 100:1 ratios). We observed that for yeast cell counts in the mixture (1:1 and 100:1 ratios), flow cytometry, the Coulter Counter, and both Spread-plate options (manual and automatic CFU counting) yielded statistically similar results, while the Drop-plate and microscopy-based methods gave statistically different results. For bacterial cell quantification, the microscopy-based method, Drop-plate, and both Spread-plate plating options and flow cytometry (1:1 ratio) produced no significantly different results (p > .05). In contrast, the Coulter Counter (1:1 ratio) and flow cytometry (100:1 ratio) presented results statistically different (p < .05). Additionally, quantifying bacterial cells in a mixed suspension at a 100:1 ratio wasn't possible due to an overlap between yeast cell debris and bacterial cells. We conclude that each method has limitations, advantages, and disadvantages. One-Sentence Summary This study compares methods for simultaneously quantifying yeast and bacterial cells in a mixed sample, highlighting that in different cell proportions, some methods cannot quantify both cell types and present distinct advantages and limitations regarding time, cost, and precision.

Funder

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Reference37 articles.

1. Flow cytometry: Basic principles and applications;Adan;Critical reviews in biotechnology,2017

2. Comparison of molecular techniques with other methods for identification and enumeration of probiotics in fermented milk products;Bagheripoor-Fallah;Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition,2015

3. Technical note-Neubauer chamber cell counting;Bastidas,..

4. Microbial contamination of fuel ethanol fermentations;Beckner;Letters in Applied Microbiology,2011

5. Conventional and nonconventional strategies for controlling bacterial contamination in fuel ethanol fermentations;Ceccato-Antonini,2018

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3