MICROSTRUCTURE OF GEL FILMS OF BACTERIAL CELLULOSE SYNTHESIZED UNDER STATIC CONDITIONS OF CULTIVATION OF THE GLUCONACETOBACTER HANSENII GH-1/2008 STRAIN ON NUTRIENT MEDIA WITH DIFFERENT CARBON SOURCES

A. L. Bolgova; Болгова А. Л.; A. A. Shevtsov; Шевцов А. А.; N. A. Arkharova; Архарова Н. А.; D. N. Karimov; Каримов Д. Н.; I. S.  Makarov; Макаров И. С.; T. I.  Gromovykh; Громовых Т. И.; V. V. Klechkovskaya; Клечковская В. В.

doi:10.31857/S002347612370025X

MICROSTRUCTURE OF GEL FILMS OF BACTERIAL CELLULOSE SYNTHESIZED UNDER STATIC CONDITIONS OF CULTIVATION OF THE GLUCONACETOBACTER HANSENII GH-1/2008 STRAIN ON NUTRIENT MEDIA WITH DIFFERENT CARBON SOURCES

Authors: Bolgova A.L.¹, Shevtsov A.A.²^,3, Arkharova N.A.⁴, Karimov D.N.⁵, Makarov I.S.⁶, Gromovykh T.I.¹^,4, Klechkovskaya V.V.⁴
Affiliations:
1. Moscow Polytechnic University, Moscow, 107023, Russia
2. Skryabin Institute of Bioengineering, Federal Research Centre “Fundamentals of Biotechnology,” Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119071 Russia
3. Institute of Artificial Intelligence AIRI, Moscow, 121170 Russia
4. Shubnikov Institute of Crystallography, Federal Scientific Research Centre “Crystallography and Photonics,” Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119333 Russia
5. Shubnikov Institute of Crystallography, Federal Scientific Research Centre “Crystallography and Photonics,”Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119333 Russia
6. Topchiev Institute of Petrochemical Synthesis, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119991 Russia
Issue: Vol 68, No 4 (2023)
Pages: 607-614
Section: ПОВЕРХНОСТЬ, ТОНКИЕ ПЛЕНКИ
URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/0023-4761/article/view/137444
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S002347612370025X
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/IENXQA
ID: 137444

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access
Restricted Access

Access granted
Restricted Access

Subscription Access

Abstract
About the authors
References
Supplementary files
Statistics

Abstract

The study presents a comparative analysis of the structures of dried films of bacterial cellulose (BC) produced by bacteria of the Gluconacetobacter hansenii GH-1/2008 strain under static conditions of cultivation on nutrient media with different carbon sources, such as glucose, sucrose, maltose, fructose, and lactose. It was found that the supramolecular structure of the films is a three-dimensional network composed of orientationally ordered microfibrils with an average diameter from 30 to 60 nm, which consist of crystalline and amorphous regions. An analysis of the powder X-ray diffraction patterns demonstrated that the crystalline regions of microfibrils are formed by cellulose I. Depending on the composition of the nutrient medium, the degree of crystallinity of the films varies in the range from ~20 to 90%. It was found that, regardless of the carbon source, the top and bottom surfaces of BC films have different microstructures defined by static conditions of cultivation. Thus, the top surface of gel films contains pores with a diameter of up to 500 nm, whereas a wider pore size distribution (up to 600 nm) is observed on the bottom surface. The difference between the average pore sizes on the top and bottom surfaces varies from 95 to 180 nm and from 100 to 200 nm, respectively. The measurements of the mechanical properties of the films showed that the films produced by the cultivation on media containing fructose and sucrose have the maximum strength, whereas the films produced using lactose and maltose have the minimum strength. The data on the BC productivity of the GH-1/2008 strain were obtained.

Keywords

GEL FILMS OF BACTERIAL CELLULOSE, MICROSTRUCTURE

References

Basu A., Vadanan S.V., Lim S. // Sci Rep. 2018. P. 447. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23701-y
Ross P., Mayer R., Benziman M. // Microbiol. Rev. 1991. V. 55. № 1. P. 35. https://doi.org/10.1128/mr.55.1.35-58.1991
Hassan E.A., Abdelhady H.M., El-Salam S.S. A. et al. // Microbiol. Res. J. 2015. V. 9. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.9734/BMRJ/2015/18223
Hong F., Qiu K. // Carbohydr. Polym. 2008. P. 545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2007.09.015
Huang Y., Zhu C., Yang J. et al. // Cellulose. 2014. V. 21. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0088-z
Frone A.N., Panaitescu D.M., Nicolae C.A. et al. // Polymers. 2020. V. 14. 5358. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14245358
Arkharova N., Suvorova E., Severin A. et al. // Scanning. 2016. V. 38. P. 757. https://doi.org/10.1002/sca.21325
Svensson A., Nicklasson E., Harrah T. et al. // Biomaterials. 2005. P. 419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.02.049
Буянов А.Л., Гофман И.В., Хрипунов А.К. и др. // Высокомолекулярные соединения. А. 2013. Т. 55. С. 512. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0507547513050036
Millon L., Wan W. // Biomed. Mater. Res. B. Appl. Biomater. 2006. V. 79 (2). P. 245. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.30535
Klemm D., Schumann D., Udhardt U. et al. // Prog. Polym. Sci. 2001. V. 26. P. 1561. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6700(01)00021-1
Wan Y., Gao C., Han M. et al. // Polym. Adv. Technol. 2011. V. 22. P. 2643. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9010107
Wang J., Gao C., Zhang Y. et al. // Mater. Sci. Eng. C. 2010. P. 214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2009.10.006
Yoshino A., Tabuchi M., Uo M. // Acta Biomater. 2013. V. 9. P. 6116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2012.12.022
Coffindaffer T.W., Heath B.P., Kyte K.E. et al. U.S. Patent 8.097.574. 2012.
Hasan N., Biak D.R.A., Kamarudin S. // Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inform. Technol. 2012. V. 2. P. 272. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.2.4.201
Amnuaikit T., Chusuit T., Raknam P. et al. // Med. Dev. 2011. V. 4. P. 77. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S20935
Czaja W., Romanovicz D., Brown Rm. // Cellulose. 2004. V. 11. P. 403. https://doi.org/10. 1023/b:cell.0000046412.11983.61
Watanabe K., Tabuchi M., Morinaga Y. et al. // Cellulose. 1998. V. 5. P. 187. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009272904582
Wang J., Tavakoli J., Tang Y. // Carbohydrate Polymers. 2019. V. 219. P. 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.05.008
Bakhman M., Petrukhin I.Yu., Butenko I.Ye. et al. // EHO. 2018. № 6–2 (40). P. 61.
Singhsa P., Narain R., Manuspiya H. // Cellulose. 2018. V. 25. P. 1571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1699-1
Costa A., Almeida F., Vinhas G. et al. // Front. Microbiol. 2017. V. 8. P. 528. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02027
Mikkelsen D., Flanagan B.M., Dykes G.A. et al. // Microbiol. 2009. V. 107. P. 576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04226.x
Keshk S.M.A.S., Sameshima K. // Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2005. V. 4. № 6. P. 478. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2005.000-3087
Wang S.S., Han Y.-H., Chen J.-L. et al. // Polymers. 2018. V. 10. P. 963. https://doi.org/10.1016/10.3390/polym10090963
Киселева О.И., Луценко С.В., Фельдман Н.Б. и др. // Вестн. Том. гос. ун-та. Биология. 2021. № 53. С. 22. https://doi.org/10.17223/19988591/53/2
Gromovykh T.I., Pigaleva M.A., Gallyamov M.O. et al. // Carbohydr. Polym. 2020. V. 237. P. 116140 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.116140
Skvortsova Z.N., Gromov T.I., Grachev V.S. et al. // Colloid J. 2019. V. 81. № 4. P. 441. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061933X19040161
Gromovykh T.I., Fan M.K., Danil’chuk T.N. Gluconacetobacter hansenii GH-1/2008 bacterial strain - bacterial cellulose producer // Patent RF. № 2464307. 2012.
Hestrin S., Schramm M. // Biochem. J. 1954. V. 58. P. 345. https://doi.org/10.1042/bj0580345
Bi J.C., Liu S.X., Li C.F. et al. // J. Appl. Microbiol. 2014. V. 117. P. 1305.
Atalla R., Vanderhart D. // Science. 1984. V. 223. P. 283. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.223.4633.283
French A.D. // Cellulose. 2014. V. 21. P. 885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-4
Fink H.-P., Purz H., Bohn A., Kunze J. // Macromol. Symp. 1997. V. 120. P. 207. https://doi.org/10.1021/bm3005929
Клечковская В.В., Баклагина Ю.Г., Степина Н.Д. и др. // Кристаллография. 2003. Т. 48. № 5. С. 813. https://doi.org/10.1134/1.1612596
Horii F., Yamamoto H., Hirai A. // Macromol. Symp. 1997. V. 120. P. 197. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.19971200120
Алешина Л.А., Глазкова С.В., Луговская Л.А. и др. // Химия растительного сырья. 2001. № 1. С. 5.