SCREENING CRITERIA AND METHODS

An ideal screen would consider growth physiology, including cell size and numbers, and metabolite production of algal strains. The algal growth physiology for biofuel encompasses a number of parameters, such as maximum cell density, maximum spe­cific growth rate, and tolerance to environmental variables such as temperature, pH, salinity, oxygen levels, CO2 levels, and nutrient requirements (Chisti, 2007; Brennan and Owende, 2010). Because all these parameters require significant experimental effort, the development of automated systems that provide information regarding all parameters simultaneously would be helpful. Screening for metabolite production may involve determining the cellular composition of proteins, lipids, and carbohy­drates, and measuring the productivity of the organism regarding metabolites useful for biofuel generation. The exact screenings employed would depend on the cultiva­tion approaches and fuel precursor desired. For example, a helpful screening for oil production would allow for distinguishing between neutral and polar lipids, and would provide fatty acid profiles. Furthermore, many strains also secrete metabolites

Advantages and Disadvantages of Microalgal Purification Techniques

TABLE 3.5

Purification

Technique

Advantages

Disadvantages

Ref.

Pringsheim’s

• Single cells can be

• Laborious and

Guillard, 1973;

micropipette

successively

time-consuming

Melkonian, 1990

method

transferred and

method requiring

Agar plating (or

purified

• Relatively easy

considerable manual skills

• The method often fails with small nonflagellate cells, which are more difficult to recognize during serial transfers

• Some delicate flagellates are easily damaged during successive micropipette transfers

• Cannot be used with

Hoshaw and

spraying)

most flagellate taxa

Rosowski, 1973

Serial dilution

• Relatively easy

that fail to grow on solid substrates • Unsuccessful when

Brahamsha, 1996

Differential

• Less damaging to

the numerical ratio between algae and bacteria is unfavorable • Costly method

Wiedeman et al.,

centrifugation

sensitive cells

1964

Filtration

• Less damaging to

• It is problematical

Melkonian, 1990

Use of antibiotics

sensitive cells and usually gives better separation of algae from bacteria than differential centrifugation • Relatively easy

with small algal cells and with cells secreting mucilage because of bacteria embedded in the mucilage that may also clog filters • Damage the alga as

McDaniel et al., 1962

• Low cost

well as leads to increased resistance levels in contaminating bacteria

TABLE 3.5 (Continued)

Advantages and Disadvantages of Microalgal Purification Techniques

Purification

Technique

Advantages

Disadvantages

Ref.

Flow cytometry

• Precise and rapid

• Requires

Sensen et al., 1993

method

considerable costs

• Simultaneous

for equipment and its

measurements of

operation

individual particle

• Requires multi-user

volume,

or central facilities

fluorescence and

• Axenic cultures are

light scatter

difficult to obtain

properties

from algae to which

• Highly suitable for

bacteria are

separating bacteria from algae to establish axenic algal cultures

physically attached

• Can be used

directly in natural samples

• Useful for small

and delicate taxa

Ultrasonication

• Useful for

• Not a stand-alone

Steup and Melkonian,

separating attached

method

1981

bacteria from algal

• Should be coupled

cell walls or

subsequent to cell

mucilage

sorting

Immunological

• High specificity

• High cost

Han and Frazier,

methods

• Highly selective

• May cause cell

2005; Takahashi

damage

et al., 2004

Source: Adapted from Mutanda et al. (2011).

into the growth medium. Some of these could prove valuable as co-products, and new approaches are needed to develop screening methods for extracellular mate­rials. For mass culture of a given algal strain, it is also important to consider the strain’s robustness, which includes parameters such as culture consistency, resil­ience, community stability, and susceptibility to predators present in a given envi­ronment. Previous studies revealed that algal strains tested in the laboratory do not always perform similarly in outdoor mass cultures (Sheehan et al., 1998). Therefore, to determine a strain’s robustness, small-scale simulations of mass culture conditions must be performed.

At this time, the bottleneck in screening large numbers of algae stems from a lack of high-throughput methodologies that would allow simultaneous screening of multiple phenotypes, such as growth rate and metabolite productivity. Solvent extraction, for example, is the most common method for the determination of lipid content in algae, but it requires a significant quantity of biomass (Bligh and Dyer, 1959; Ahlgren and Merino, 1991). Fluorescent methods using lipid-soluble dyes have also been described, and although these methods require much less biomass (as little as a single cell), it has not yet been established if these methods are valid across a wide range of algal strains (De la Jara et al., 2003; Elsey et al., 2007). Further improvements in analytical methodology could be made through the development of solid-state screening methods. Not only are rapid screening procedures necessary for the biofuels field, but they also could prove extremely useful for the identifica­tion of species, particularly in mixed field samples necessary for the future of algal ecology. They could also reduce the number of redundant screens of algal species.