No abstract

No abstract

Research on the influence of biosurfactants on the efficiency of in situ bioremediation of contaminated soil is continuously growing. Despite the constant progress in understanding the mechanisms involved in the effects of biosurfactants, there are still many factors that are not sufficiently elucidated. There is a lack of research on autochthonous or exogenous microbial metabolism when biostimulation or bioaugmentation is carried out to produce biosurfactants at contaminated sites. In addition, studies on the application of techniques that measure the biosurfactants produced in situ are needed. This is important because, although the positive influence of biosurfactants is often reported, there are also studies where no effect or negative effects have been observed. This review aimed to examine some studies on factors that can improve the production of biosurfactants in soils during in situ bioremediation. Moreover, this work reviews the methodologies that can be used for measuring the production of these biocomposts. We reviewed studies on the potential of biosurfactants to improve the bioremediation of hydrocarbons, as well as the limitations of methods for the production of these biomolecules by microorganisms in soil.

The management of whey is a challenge for dairy products where the volume produced is remarkable. This problem is minimized through membrane separation processes (MSP) to obtain whey protein concentrate, which has high added value. However, a permeate effluent stream is still generated that is composed of lactose, vitamins, and minerals, which can serve as raw material for the production of biotechnological compounds. Thus, this study aimed to produce biosurfactants using the permeate from whey ultrafiltration as part of the culture media of the bioprocess, to recover the biosurfactant produced using MSP, and to identify the biocompound. The production was carried out using Bacillus methylotrophicus and Bacillus pumilus. The variables nitrogen source (urea or ammonium sulfate), nitrogen source concentration (0.5% or 1.0%), inducer (soybean oil or biodiesel), inducer concentration (1% or 2%), and the addition of micronutrients (with our without) were studied using a fractional factorial experimental design 2 5-1 IV . In the fermentation processes, it was possible to verify the biosurfactant production through the reduction of surface tension, obtaining a minimum value of 35.07 mN/m for B. methylotrophicus and 26.02 mN/m for B. pumilus. Recovery via MSP was an efficient strategy for biosurfactant purification, which was concentrated in the fraction of the retentate. We produced a high-value-added biocompound identified as surfactin, valuing the permeate residue from whey ultrafiltration.Results of mean AE standard deviation. Equal letters in the same column indicate that they did not present a significant difference at the 95% confidence level. RBC, relation between final and initial biomass concentration; RST, relation between initial and final surface tension; T, treatment. J Surfact DetergJ Surfact Deterg (2020) 23: 539-551Equal letters in the same column and for each microorganism indicate that they did not present a significant difference at the 95% confidence level. MSP, membrane separation processes. 547 J Surfact Deterg J Surfact Deterg (2020) 23: 539-551