Commercial‐Scale Production of Microalgae for Bioproducts

Borowitzka, Michael A.

doi:10.1002/9783527801718.ch2

Cited by 39 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Acquiring an accurate and optimal parameter for irradiance intensity is essential to achieve high biomass of phytoplankton in production. Irradiance is rapidly attenuated during high-cell density cultivation of phytoplankton [14,27]. Variation in the pigment composition of light harvesting complexes with irradiance intensity has been observed in most species of phytoplankton [4,5].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…I. galbana and D. salina are applied world-wide to generate biofuels due to their rich lipids (lipid levels between 23 and 55% by weight of dry biomass), and they are also commonly cultivated with P. subcordiformis (lipid levels between 20% and 30% by weight of dry biomass) for aquaculture in China, Japan, Australia, and southeast Asia [14,49]. To meet nutritional requirements, mixed cultures of two or more species of phytoplankton are often fed to larvae in seed farming of aquatic products [50].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, phytoplankton cells are rich in proteins, polysaccharides, lipids, vitamins, and polyunsaturated fatty acids, which have stirred up great attention as a promising potential feedstock for biofuel, nutraceuticals, animal and aquaculture feed production [10,14]. Many species have been used for commercial development, such as Dunaliella salina, Isochrysis galbana, Spirulina (or Arthrospira), Haematococcus pluvialis, and Scenedesmus obliquus [2,6,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Almost all fishes, bivalve molluscs, and crustaceans primarily graze on phytoplankton to build immunity against diseases during their early larval stages [12]. However, large-scale production of phytoplankton has rarely been successful, with no more than 1 g DW L −1 biomass that is mainly limited by the inefficiency of photosynthesis in high-cell density cultivation [11,14,15]. The photosynthetic parameters can be seen as indicators to achieve sustainable carbon assimilation and TAG accumulation in Isochrysis zhangjiangensis [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Quantifying photosynthetic performance of phytoplankton based on photosynthesis–irradiance response models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Clarifying the relationship between photosynthesis and irradiance and accurately quantifying photosynthetic performance are of importance to calculate the productivity of phytoplankton, whether in aquatic ecosystems modelling or obtaining more economical production. Results:The photosynthetic performance of seven phytoplankton species was characterized by four typical photosynthesis-irradiance (P-I) response models. However, the differences were found between the returned values to photosynthetic characteristics by different P-I models. The saturation irradiance (I sat ) was distinctly underestimated by model 1, and the maximum net photosynthetic rate (P nmax ) was quite distinct from its measured values, due to the asymptotic function of the model. Models 2 and 3 lost some foundation to photosynthetic mechanisms, that the returned I sat showed significant differences with the measured data. Model 4 for higher plants could reproduce the irradiance response trends of photosynthesis well for all phytoplankton species and obtained close values to the measured data, but the fitting curves exhibited some slight deviations under the low intensity of irradiance. Different phytoplankton species showed differences in photosynthetic productivity and characteristics. Platymonas subcordiformis showed larger intrinsic quantum yield (α) and lower I sat and light compensation point (I c ) than Dunaliella salina or Isochrysis galbana. Microcystis sp., especially M. aeruginosa with the largest P nmax and α among freshwater phytoplankton strains, exhibited more efficient light use efficiency than two species of green algae. Conclusions:The present work will be useful both to describe the behavior of different phytoplankton in a quantitative way as well as to evaluate the flexibility and reusability of P-I models. Meanwhile we believe this research could provide important insight into the structure changes of phytoplankton communities in the aquatic ecosystems. Publisher's NoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quantifying photosynthetic performance of phytoplankton based on photosynthesis–irradiance response models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Irradiance acts as a driving force in photosynthesis. The level of irradiance affects the growth, CO2 fixation efficiency, carbon metabolism, and cell composition of photosynthetic organisms [4][5][6][7][8]. While extensive studies have been carried out and many insights have enriched the basis of phytoplankton physiology in recent decades [9][10][11], the relationship remains poorly understood for phytoplankton.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantizing photosynthetic performance of phytoplankton using photosynthesis-irradiance response models

Yang

Liu

Yin

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Clarifying the relationship between photosynthesis and irradiance and accurately quantizing photosynthetic performance are of importance to calculate the productivity of phytoplankton, whether in aquatic ecosystems modelling or obtaining more economical production.Results: The photosynthetic performance of seven phytoplankton species was characterized by four typical photosynthesis-irradiance (P-I) response models. However, the differences were found between the returned values to photosynthetic characteristics by different P-I models. The saturation irradiance (Isat) was distinctly underestimated by model 1, and the maximum net photosynthetic rate (Pnmax) was quite distinct from its measured values, due to the asymptotic function of the model. Models 2 and 3 lost some foundation to photosynthetic mechanisms, that the returned Isat showed significant differences with the measured data. Model 4 for higher plants could reproduce the irradiance response trends of photosynthesis well for all phytoplankton species and obtained close values to the measured data, but the fitting curves exhibited some slight deviations under the low intensity of irradiance. Different phytoplankton species showed differences in photosynthetic productivity and characteristics. P. subcordiformis showed larger intrinsic quantum yield (α) and lower Isat and light compensation point (Ic) than D. salina or I. galbana. Microcystis sp., especially M. aeruginosa with the largest Pnmax and α among freshwater phytoplankton strains, exhibited more efficient light use efficiency than two species of green algae.Conclusions: The present work will be useful both to describe the behavior of different phytoplankton in a quantitative way as well as to evaluate the flexibility and reusability of P-I models. Meanwhile we believe this research could provide important insight into the structure changes of phytoplankton communities in the aquatic ecosystems.

show abstract