You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
Lactic Acid Bacteria in Fermentation
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/fermentation7020048

The term fermentation derives from the Latin ‘fervere’, which means to boil, due to the appearance produced by yeast on fruit or malt extracts, as a result of the production of carbon dioxide bubbles caused by the catabolism of the sugars in the extract. The most common concept of fermentation is the conversion of sugar into an organic acid, then into alcohol. It occurs naturally in many food types, and humans have used it since ancient times to improve the preservation and the organoleptic properties of food. This term is only used when referring to microorganisms (bacteria, yeasts, and fungi) to make useful products for humans such as biomasses, enzymes, primary and secondary metabolites, recombinant products, and biotransformed products used in industry. Fermentation is a catabolic process of incomplete oxidation, completely anaerobic, and its final product is an organic compound, where in the absence of oxygen, the final acceptor of the NADH electrons produced in glycolysis is not oxygen, but an organic compound that will be reduced to oxidize NADH to NAD+ . There are different types of fermentation, e.g., alcoholic, acetic, butyric, and lactic. The fermentation processes have some main purposes: (1) the enrichment of the diet by developing flavors, aromas, and textures; (2) food preservation through lactic acid, ethanol, acetic acid, and alkaline fermentations; (3) enrichment of foods with protein, amino acids, lipids, and vitamins; (4) decrease in cooking time and fuel requirements so that the loss of nutrients is less; and (5) it can produce nutrients or eliminate anti-nutrients; being the final product an organic compound that characterizes the types of fermentation.

solid-state fermentation submerged fermentation tannin-acyl-hydrolase tannins Lactiplantibacillus plantarum

1. Production of Tannases with Submerged Fermentation (SF)

Microorganisms require a controlled atmosphere to produce better final quality, ensuring optimal productivity and better benefits [1]. SF has some process characteristics which have slight advantages over control in solid-state fermentation, which are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages of submerged and solid-state fermentation.

Table
Submerged Fermentation
Advantages Reference Disadvantages Reference
Easier and the product is easy to recover [2] The difficulty for the passage of oxygen in the liquid medium [3][4]
Sterilization facilitates the process and its control [5] Detrimental to fungal growth [6][7]
Efficiency in preventing the growth of other microorganisms [8]    
Homogeneity in culture media and control in temperature and pH [9][10]    
Better control of physicochemical parameters, more biomass growth in less time [11]    
Ease in determining biomass by simple filtration or centrifugation [3]    
It is used for bioremediation of effluents in industries [12]    
Bacteria, yeasts, and fungi can be used depending on the objective [7]    
It requires less investment, less energy, and a simple means of fermentation. Better condition of bacterial control [13]    
It is used on an industrial scale, nutrients, and oxygen dissolve easily in the medium and disperse throughout the bioreactor, so heat and mass increase efficiency [6]    
Incubation time decrease, better control in the process [14]    
Have a better performance, reduces costs and is sustainable, making it beneficial for the environment and the economy of production [15]    
Solid-State Fermentation
Effective to produce enzymes [16] Low O2 and CO2 transfer ratio, it is difficult to monitor, control, and scale. There is no uniformity in culture [2]
Effective to produce bioactive compounds [17] Slower microorganism’s growth [18]
Lower demand for water and energy, easy aeration in the medium [3] It is less efficient for the growth of microorganisms that require high water content [19]
Most used for agro-industrial waste. Economical and superior enzymatic performance [20]    
There is less waste of water, simplicity [17]    
They are much more efficient fermentations; their products are stable and can be easily recovered [6]    

In submerged fermentation processes, nutrients are used, and some enzymes such as tannase, amylase, and glucoamylases are released, to name a few [7]. It is the most widely used type of fermentation in the industry due to its simplicity, and its final product is easier to recover. The development of microorganisms is typical, which gives rise to a dormancy phase, growth, stationary phase, and death phase. These phases are present in submerged and solid-state fermentation, divided into several types—batch, continuous, and fed—according to the input and output of the substrate and product, and are used for the bioremediation of industrial effluents [2]. In the SF, the initial water content and inoculum and substrate are important; the conditions of the culture medium can produce a wide range of bioactive compounds that have benefits for human health [8]. It is the most widely used in the food industry to obtain enzymes with different substrates and microorganisms.

2. Production of Tannases Using Solid-State Fermentation

Solid-state fermentation is an effective method to produce microbial enzymes and bioactive compounds [17], allowing the accumulation high-value products. Its main products are enzymes produced using agro-industrial waste. Microorganisms grow by joining solid substrates, imitating their habitat, giving a fruitful result [21]. In this process, the substrate and nutrients can be reused, although this type of fermentation does not apply to bacteria because they require a high-water content [1]. However, it is much more attractive because its chemical and physical processes are low cost, simpler, and have better yields; it allows reproducible conditions similar to the environment in which microorganisms live [16]. Solid-state fermentation has advantages in terms of the final product concentration, has a lower water expenditure, requires less sterile conditions, and has a low repression effect [22]. It is a slightly more laborious process because the growth of the microorganism is slower; there is a low transfer of oxygen and carbon dioxide, heat removal, and it can easily be contaminated [2]. A fundamental stage is the culture media preparation to ensure the fermentation process productivity [23]. The problem that may arise is that the culture substrate is uneven, and changes in temperature, pH, humidity, and substrate concentration lead to making it less reproducible [24]. The water content is an extremely important parameter to produce the desired final product [25]. Growth is carried out on a solid substrate almost without water, but with enough to tolerate growth and metabolism. In solid-state fermentation, the particle size and the humidity level are the most critical factors, as well as the initial pH, substrate, aeration, temperature, inoculation, and incubation [26]. Figure 2 shows the production process of enzymes from agro-industrial waste through solid-state and submerged fermentation.

Fermentation 07 00048 g002 550

Figure 2. Diagram showing the main enzyme production processes through solid-state and submerged fermentation (original source).

3. Microorganisms Used in Tannases Production

Tannases can be produced from microorganisms, plants, and animals, even though the most widely used microorganisms are fungi, yeasts, and bacteria. Aspergillus and Penicillium are the most used genera in tannase production; around 27 and 24 species, respectively, have been evaluated for tannase production. Paecilomyces variotii is the best tannase producer using grape pomace as substrate [27]. Four species of Trichoderma and three species of Fusarium have been also evaluated. Regarding bacteria, Lactobacillus is the most studied [5], mainly Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, but Bacillus spp. and Corynebacterium spp. have been also studied [28]. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) degrade gallotannins to gallic acid, but they live under extreme conditions [29]. Bacteria can change and repair the membrane to reduce the effect of tannins on the digestive tract, increasing the number of unsaturated fatty acids, modifying their isomerization [30].

There are a variety of microorganisms that produce tannases that have been studied for a long time in terms of process, development, and application; the microorganisms for the activation and production of tannases are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Microorganisms used to produce tannases.

Table
Microorganism Reference
Aspergillus niger [28]
Enterococcus faecalis [31]
Aspergillus ficuum [32]
Achromobacter
Corynebacterium spp. and Klebsiella pneumoniae [21]
Azotobacter
Lactiplantibacillus paraplantarum		 [33]
Aspergillus oryzae [31]
Lactiplantibacillus paraplantarum
Fusarium
Trichoderma		 [32]
Enterobacter cloacae [21]

4. Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB) That Produce Tannases

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) have important applications in the food industry and other sectors, as shown in Table 3, for the added value they give to products, influencing the taste, odor, texture, nutritional value, and sensory characteristics. The genus Leuconostoc, Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Pediococcus, and Lactobacillus [12] LAB have been used in submerged fermentation to produce tannases [28]. They are made up of a large group of Gram-positive, non-sporulated bacteria and are the largest producers of lactic acid; they have preservative power because they have antimicrobial properties and have a high content of organic acids and bacteriocins that inhibit the growth of bacteria [34]. LAB are present in groups of microorganisms called starters or lactic cultures, where lactic acid is their main metabolite. LAB are unable to synthesize some vitamins, specific peptides, and amino acids for their growth but can produce antimicrobial substances known as bacteriocins and hydrogen peroxide [35]. They are mesophilic, but some can grow in refrigeration at 4 °C, and others at 45 °C, with a preference for an acidic pH (4–4.5), although sometimes tolerate up to pH 9. They play an important role in biotransformation because they can act on the isolation of new chains of tannases. Among the LAB, the first to be tested to produce tannases was Lactiplantibacillus plantarum [28]. One of the least used microorganisms to obtain tannins through fermentation by LAB [36], there are reports that they degrade and hydrolyze natural tannins and tannic acid efficiently [37]. Their cell wall contains glycerol, teichoic acids, and peptidoglycans [38]. On the other hand, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum was used to produce tannases from olive mill residues using a basic medium, plus 100 mL supplementation with tannic acid as a carbon source and inoculated with 1.38 mg of cells which were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h [39]. It is an optional heterofermentative; it can produce lactic acid and other by-products such as acetate and ethanol, depending on its growing conditions and its carbon source [40]. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum is the most widely used bacteria because it has the greatest yield on plant fermentations where tannins are abundant due to their strains having tannase activity [30], playing an important role in food microbiology and human nutrition for their fermentative power and probiotic functions. It also has effects on cholesterol levels, inhibiting inflammation by acting on interleukins IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor α [35]. The importance of the growth of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum stands out in the technological and physiological characteristics of the probiotic strains, the amino acids valine, arginine, tyrosine, and tryptophan, pantothenic acid and nicotinic acid which are essential, as well as manganese and iron [41]. While the growth during a Lactobacillus fermentation occurs at a pH of 4.5 to 5.8 [35]. Tannase production with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum occurs at 37 °C, with pH 6.0, within 24 h, with tannic acid as a carbon source and the presence of nitrogen ammonium sulfate [42]. Several studies have been carried out obtaining the optimized fermentation process with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum with a maximum tannase activity of 6 U ml-1 [39].

Table 3. Applications biotechnological of lactic acid bacteria (LAB).

Table
Microorganism Isolation Source Application Reference
Limosilactobacillus reuteri Whole
wheat sourdough		 Antifungal activity against Aspergillus niger [43]
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. lactis NRRL B-633, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. cremoris NRRL B-634, Pediococcus
acidilactici NRRL B-1116, P. pentosaceus NRRL B-14009, Leuconostoc
mesenteroides subsp. mesenteroides NRRL B-1118, Latilactobacillus sakei subsp. sakei NRRL B1917,
Limosilactobacillus fermentum NRRL B-1932, Limosilactobacillus reuteri NRRL B-14171, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum NRRL B-4496, Lactobacillus acidophilus NRRL B-4495, Lacticaseibacillus casei NRRL B1922,
Levilactobacillus brevis ATCC 367, Lacticaseibacillus casei 21/1, Lactobacillus amylovorus ATCC 33621,
Fructilactobacillus sanfranciscensis ATCC 27651, and Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus NRRL B-442.		 - Antimicrobials in vitro against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Shigella sonnei,
Pseudomonas fluorescens, Salmonella typhimurium, or Listeria monocytogenes		 [44]
Lactobacillus spp. - Produces exopolysaccharides that have interesting film-forming properties and may be used to produce edible packaging. [45]
Enterococcus mundtii STw38 Tehuelche scallop (Aequipecten tehuelchus), Patagonian Argentinean
clam (Ameghinomya antique), Patagonian blue mussel (Mytilus edulis
platensis), sea cucumber (Hemiodema spectabilis), geoduck (Panopea
generosa) and razor clam (Solen tehuelchus) of the Argentine
coast		 Reducing the development of native flora of fish paste. [46]
P. pentosaceus
FP3, Ligilactobacillus salivarius FP35, Ligilactobacillus salivarius FP25, and E. faecium FP51		 Collected from 17 healthy infant feces samples in the hospital of Chiang Mai. The use of these probiotics may be suitable as an alternative bioprophylactic and biotherapeutic strategy for colon cancer. [47]
7 Lacticaseibacillus casei, 27 Lacticaseibacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei, 15 Lactiplantibacillus plantarum subsp. plantarum, 7 Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. lactis, 1 E. faecium, and 1 Enterococcus lactis. Traditional Italian cheeses. These strains with proven in vitro properties are good candidates for novel probiotic-containing formulations and could be used to functionalize foods such as dairy fermented products. [48]
S. thermophilus, Lactococcus lactis SL242, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Lactis SL28 and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. lactis IO-1 - Development method presented is natural and low-cost and allows for the production of clean-label and lactose-free dairy products without using commercial enzymes from recombinant microorganisms. [49]
Streptococcus
salivarius subsp. thermophilus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii
subsp. bulgaricus, and Lactobacillus acidophilus, Acetobacter aceti,
Bifidobacterium bifidum, B. adolescentics, B. longum,
B. animalis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactococcus lactis subsp.
cremoris, Propionibacterium freudenreichii, Enterococcus faecium
and Streptococcus salivarius subsp. thermophilus		 Iprovit Bacterial Milk-Yogurt Starter™, Symbilact Vivo Starter™ and Provit
Streptosan Milk Starter™		 The development of edible coatings containing LAB to wheat bread diminished the number of mesophilic aerobic and facultative aerobic bacteria in the bread crust and protected it from contamination of mycelium fungi of genera Aspergillus and Penicillium. [50]
Lactiplantibacillus plantarum:
TL-1, TL-2, TP-2, TP-5, I-UL4, I 11, RG 11, RG 14, RS 5. 6 Pediococcus pentosaceus: B12m9, TB-1, TL-3, TP-3, TP-4, TP-8. 2 Pediococcus acidilactici: TB-2, TP-6.		 Tempeh-fermented
soybean cake, apai ubi-fermented
cassava, ikan
rebus-steam fish, budu-fermented fish sauce, tempeh-fermented
soybean cake and empeh-fermented soybean cake		 LAB isolates possess versatile extracellular proteolytic system and have vast capability of producing various amino acids including as methionine, lysine, threonine and tryptophan. [51]

5. Agro-Industrial Wastes to Obtain Tannases

Agro-industrial wastes rich in polyphenolic compounds can be used as a source of carbon and energy so that the microorganism can develop and produce tannases. This section describes some research papers where they used agro-industrial waste to produce tannases with the help of microorganisms. For example, coffee pulp rich in polyphenolic compounds as a source of carbon and energy were evaluated through a solid-state fermentation process for tannase production. The authors concluded that the utilization of this wastes for tannase production has potential applications in the food industry [52]. In another study, solid-state fermentation was used for tannase production, using a medium containing pomegranate peels (10%) and other salts with pH adjusted to 7.0. These production conditions were compared to define the optimal ones, and various carbon sources, including Moringa cake, palm kernel, palm fronds, wheat straw, olive cake, and pomegranate peels were evaluated [53]. Tannase production from solid-state fermentation using coir waste as a substrate was performed. In the reactors, 10 g of the substrate were added and subsequently incubated at 30 °C for 48 h [54]. The tannase-biotransformed grape pomace extracts were evaluated to prove intestinal anti-inflammatory activity using an in vitro colon model. This research mentioned that the biotransformation improved the anti-inflammatory effect in Caco-2 cells, indicating that the application of a bioprocess in grape residues may contribute to the development of new ingredients and nutraceuticals with anti-inflammatory potential [55]. Various agricultural wastes (coffee husk, tamarind seed powder, bagasse, groundnut oil cake, wheat bran and rice bran) and solid substrates (bengal gram powder (Cicer arietinum), black gram flour (Vigna mungo L.), green gram flour (Phasleolus aureus), barley (Hordeum vulgare), millet flour (Peninsetum glaucum), ragi (Eleusine coracana), oats (Avena sativa), corn flour and rice flour) were evaluated to produce tannase by Lactiplantibacillus plantarum [56]. In another study, agro-industrial wastes were shown to be generally rich in tannins and can be used as low-cost substrates for tannase production. Agro-industrial wastes as potential substrates were evaluated for enhanced tannase production using solid-state fermentation. Rice bran showed the highest tannase activity during solid-state fermentation, followed by brewer’s rice, spent coffee grounds, and desiccated coconut waste [20]. The cost-effective substrate Triphala was used as a tannin and energy source for tannase production through solid-state fermentation. In this research, statistical experimental design with Triphala at optimized conditions showed 6.1-fold higher tannase activity than that obtained in submerged fermentation [14]. Tannase production was optimized using pomegranate husk as a solid substrate. Easily available and low-cost substrates such as cow dung, coffee husk, apple peel, and pomegranate peel were initially screened for tannase production [57]. On the other hand, a cocktail of hydrolytic enzymes was performed by solid-state fermentation using as substrate a mixture of grape pomace and wheat bran. They concluded that the use of solid-state fermentation is a less costly alternative to obtain an enzymatic cocktail that can be used in the food industry [58].

References

  1. Jiménez-Martín, N. Metabolismo de Galotaninos en Bacterias Con Actividad Tanasa Presentes en El Tracto Gastrointestinal Humano. Ph.D. Thesis, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain, July 2014.
  2. Suárez-Arango, C. Utilización de la Fermentación Líquida de Lentinula Edodes (Shiitake), para la Producción de Metabolitos Secundarios Bioactivos y Evaluación de su Potencial Empleo en la Producción de un Alimento Funcional. Master’s Thesis, National University of Colombia, Bogota, Colombia, 2012.
  3. Coradi, G.V.; Da Visitação, V.L.; De Lima, E.A.; Saito, L.Y.T.; Palmieri, D.A.; Takita, M.A.; Neto, P.D.O.; Nascimento, V.M.G. Comparing submerged and solid-state fermentation of agro-industrial residues for the production and characterization of lipase. Ann. Microbiol. 2012, 63, 533–540.
  4. Pintać, D.; Četojević-Simin, D.; Berežni, S.; Orčić, D.; Mimica-Dukić, N.; Lesjak, M. Investigation of the chemical composition and biological activity of edible grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) leaf varieties. Food Chem. 2019, 286, 686–695.
  5. Selwal, M.K.; Selwal, K.K. High-level tannase production by Penicillum atramentosum KM using agro residues under submerged fermentation. Ann. Microbiol. 2012, 62, 139–148.
  6. Hemansi; Chakraborty, S.; Yadav, G.; Saini, J.K.; Kuhad, R.C. Comparative Study of Cellulase Production Using Submerged and Solid-State Fermentation. In New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Srivastava, N., Srivastava, M., Singh, R.L., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 99–113.
  7. Barragán, L.P.; Figueroa, J.; Durán, L.R.; González, C.A.; Hennigs, C. Fermentative Production Methods. In Biotransformation of Agricultural Waste and By-Products; Poltronieri, P., D’Urso, O.F., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 189–217.
  8. Fernandes, M.B.A.; Habu, S.; De Lima, M.A.; Soccol, V.T.; Soccol, C.R. Influence of drying methods over in vitro antitumoral effects of exopolysaccharides produced by Agaricus blazei LPB 03 on submerged fermentation. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2010, 34, 253–261.
  9. Colla, L.M.; Primaz, A.L.; Benedetti, S.; Loss, R.A.; De Lima, M.; Reinehr, C.O.; Bertolin, T.E.; Costa, J.A.V. Surface response methodology for the optimization of lipase production under submerged fermentation by filamentous fungi. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2016, 47, 461–467.
  10. Chegwin, C.A.; Nieto, R.I.J. Influence of culture medium in the production of secondary metabolites of edible fungus Pleurotus ostreatus cultivated by liquid state fermentation using grain flour as a carbon source. Rev. Mex. Micol. 2013, 37, 1–9.
  11. Kirsch, L.D.S.; De Macedo, A.J.P.; Teixeira, M.F.S. Production of mycelial biomass by the Amazonian edible mushroom Pleurotus albidus. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2016, 47, 658–664.
  12. Parras-Huertas, R.A. Review lactic acid bacteria: Functional role in the foods. Rev. Bio. Agro 2010, 8, 93–105.
  13. Kiran, E.U.; Trzcinski, A.P.; Ng, W.J.; Liu, Y. Enzyme Production from Food Wastes Using a Biorefinery Concept. Waste Biomass Valoriz. 2014, 5, 903–917.
  14. Lekshmi, R.; Nisha, S.A.; Kaaleeswaran, B.; Alfarhan, A. Pomegranate peel is a low-cost substrate for the production of tannase by Bacillus velezensis TA3 under solid state fermentation. J. King Saud. Univ. Sci. 2020, 32, 1831–1837.
  15. Liu, J.; Luo, Y.; Guo, T.; Tang, C.; Chai, X.; Zhao, W.; Bai, J.; Lin, Q. Cost-effective pigment production by Monascus purpureus using rice straw hydrolysate as substrate in submerged fermentation. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2020, 129, 229–236.
  16. Chebaibi, S.; Grandchamp, M.L.; Burgé, G.; Clément, T.; Allais, F.; Laziri, F. Improvement of protein content and decrease of anti-nutritional factors in olive cake by solid-state fermentation: A way to valorize this industrial by-product in animal feed. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2019, 128, 384–390.
  17. Li, Y.; Peng, X.; Chen, H. Comparative characterization of proteins secreted by Neurospora sitophilia in solid-state and submerged fermentation. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2013, 116, 493–498.
  18. Suárez-Arango, C.; Nieto, I.J. Biotechnological cultivation of edible macro-fungi: An alternative in obtaining nutraceuticals. Rev. Iberoam. Mycol. 2012, 30, 1–8.
  19. Joshi, R.; Sharma, V.; Kuila, A. Fermentation Technology: Current Status and Future Prospects. In Principles and Applications of Fermentation Technology, 1st ed.; Kuila, A., Sharma, V., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 1–13.
  20. Mansor, A.; Ramli, M.; Rashid, N.A.; Samat, N.; Lani, M.; Sharifudin, S.; Raseetha, S. Evaluation of selected agri-industrial residues as potential substrates for enhanced tannase production via solid-state fermentation. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2019, 20, 101216.
  21. Govindarajan, R.K.; Mathivanan, K.; Rameshkumar, N.; Shyu, D.J.H.; Krishnan, M.; Kayalvizhi, N. Purification, structural characterization and biotechnological potential of tannase enzyme produced by Enterobacter cloacae strain 41. Process Biochem. 2019, 77, 37–47.
  22. Zhang, B.B.; Xing, H.B.; Jiang, B.J.; Chen, L.; Xu, G.R.; Jiang, Y.; Zhang, D.Y. Using millet as substrate for efficient production of monacolin K by solid-state fermentation of Monascus ruber. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2018, 125, 333–338.
  23. Julian, R.M.C.; Ramos-Sánchez, L.B.; Suárez-Rodríguez, Y. Fermentación en estado sólido (II) optimización de medios de cultivos. Tecnol. Química 2008, 28, 5–10.
  24. Ito, K.; Gomi, K.; Kariyama, M.; Miyake, T. Rapid enzyme production and mycelial growth in solid-state fermentation using the non-airflow box. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2013, 116, 585–590.
  25. Ito, K.; Gomi, K.; Kariyama, M.; Miyake, T. Change in enzyme production by gradually drying culture substrate during solid-state fermentation. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2015, 119, 674–677.
  26. Rodríguez-Durán, L.V.; Valdivia-Urdiales, B.; Contreras-Esquivel, J.C.; Rodríguez-Herrera, R.; Aguilar, C.N. Química y biotecnología de la tanasa. Acta Química Mex. 2010, 2, 1–10.
  27. Martins, I.M.; Macedo, G.A.; Macedo, J.A.; Roberto, B.; Chen, Q.; Blumberg, J.B.; Chen, C. Tannase enhances the anti-inflammatory effect of grape pomace in Caco-2 cells treated with IL-1b. J. Funct. Foods 2016, 29, 69–76.
  28. Farha, A.K.; Yang, Q.-Q.; Kim, G.; Li, H.-B.; Zhu, F.; Liu, H.-Y.; Gan, R.-Y.; Corke, H. Tannins as an alternative to antibiotics. Food Biosci. 2020, 38, 100751.
  29. Govindarajan, R.K.; Revathi, S.; Rameshkumar, N.; Krishnan, M.; Kayalvizhi, N. Microbial tannase: Current perspectives and biotechnological advances. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2016, 6, 168–175.
  30. Jiménez, N.; Esteban-Torres, M.; Mancheño, J.M.; Rivas, B.D.L.; Muñoz, R. Tannin Degradation by a Novel Tannase Enzyme Present in Some Lactobacillus plantarum Strains. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2014, 80, 2991–2997.
  31. Ichikawa, K.; Shiono, Y.; Shintani, T.; Watanabe, A.; Kanzaki, H.; Gomi, K.; Koseki, T. Efficient production of recombinant tannase in Aspergillus oryzae using an improved glucoamylase gene promoter. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2020, 129, 150–154.
  32. Kanpiengjai, A.; Unban, K.; Nguyen, T.-H.; Haltrich, D.; Khanongnuch, C. Expression and biochemical characterization of a new alkaline tannase from Lactobacillus pentosus. Protein Expr. Purif. 2019, 157, 36–41.
  33. Sharma, K. Tannin degradation by phytopathogen’s tannase: A Plant’s defense perspective. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2019, 21, 101342.
  34. López, T.; Prado-Barragán, A.; Nevárez-Moorillón, G.V.; Contreras, J.C.; Rodríguez, R.; Aguilar, C.N. Enhancement of antioxidant capacity of coffee pulp extracts by solid-state lactic fermentation. CYTA J. Food 2013, 11, 359–365.
  35. Jurado-Gámez, H.; Ramírez, C.; Aguirre, D. Fermentation kinetics of Lactobacillus plantarum at a rich culture medium as a potential probiotic. Vet. Anim. Sci. 2013, 7, 37–53.
  36. Bamforth, C.W.; Cook, D.J. The Science Underpinning Food Fermentation. In Food, Fermentation, and Micro-Organisms, 2nd ed.; Bamforth, C.W., Cook, D.J., Eds.; Wiley Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 5–42.
  37. Chandrasekaran, M.; Beena, P. Tannase: Source, Biocatalytic Characteristics, and Bioprocesses for Production. In Marine Enzymes for Biocatalysis; Trincone, A., Ed.; Elsevier: London, UK, 2013; pp. 259–293.
  38. Mayo, B.; Flórez, A.B. Lactic Acid Bacteria: Lactobacillus spp. Lactobacillus plantarum. In Reference Module in Food Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020.
  39. Aguilar-Zárate, P.; Cruz-Hernández, M.A.; Montañez, J.C.; Belmares-Cerda, R.E.; Aguilar, C.N. Bacterial tannases: Production, properties and applications. Rev. Mex. Ing. Quim. 2014, 13, 63–74.
  40. Zhang, Z.; Man, C.; Sun, L.; Yang, X.; Li, M.; Jiang, Y.; Zhang, W. Short communication: Complete genome sequence of Lactobacillus plantarum J26, a probiotic strain with immunomodulatory activity. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 10838–10844.
  41. Pérez-Leonard, H.; Hernández-Monzón, A. Evaluation of substrates with aloe vera juice for the growth of Lactobacillus plantarum. RTQ 2015, 35, 156–166.
  42. Yao, J.; Guo, G.S.; Ren, G.H.; Liu, Y. Production, characterization and applications of tannase. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2014, 101, 137–147.
  43. Sadeghi, A.; Ebrahimi, M.; Mortazavi, S.A.; Abedfar, A. Application of the selected antifungal LAB isolate as a protective starter culture in pan whole-wheat sourdough bread. Food Control 2019, 95, 298–307.
  44. Arrioja-Bretón, D.; Mani-López, E.; Palou, E.; López-Malo, A. Antimicrobial activity and storage stability of cell-free supernatants from lactic acid bacteria and their applications with fresh beef. Food Control 2020, 115, 107286.
  45. Moradi, M.; Guimarães, J.T.; Sahin, S. Current applications of exopolysaccharides from lactic acid bacteria in the development of food active edible packaging. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2021, 40, 33–39.
  46. DelCarlo, S.B.; Parada, R.; Schelegueda, L.I.; Vallejo, M.; Marguet, E.R.; Campos, C.A. From the isolation of bacteriocinogenic LAB strains to the application for fish paste biopreservation. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 110, 239–246.
  47. Thirabunyanon, M.; Hongwittayakorn, P. Potential Probiotic Lactic Acid Bacteria of Human Origin Induce Antiproliferation of Colon Cancer Cells via Synergic Actions in Adhesion to Cancer Cells and Short-Chain Fatty Acid Bioproduction. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2013, 169, 511–525.
  48. Albano, C.; Morandi, S.; Silvetti, T.; Casiraghi, M.; Manini, F.; Brasca, M. Lactic acid bacteria with cholesterol-lowering properties for dairy applications: In vitro and in situ activity. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 10807–10818.
  49. Wang, Q.; Lillevang, S.K.; Rydtoft, S.M.; Xiao, H.; Fan, M.; Solem, C.; Liu, J.; Jensen, P.R. No more cleaning up—Efficient lactic acid bacteria cell catalysts as a cost-efficient alternative to purified lactase enzymes. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 6315–6323.
  50. Gregirchak, N.; Stabnikova, O.; Stabnikov, V. Application of Lactic Acid Bacteria for Coating of Wheat Bread to Protect it from Microbial Spoilage. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2020, 75, 223–229.
  51. Lim, Y.H.; Foo, H.L.; Loh, T.C.; Mohamad, R.; Abdullah, N. Comparative studies of versatile extracellular proteolytic activities of lactic acid bacteria and their potential for extracellular amino acid productions as feed supplements. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2019, 10, 1–13.
  52. Bhoite, R.N.; Murthy, P.S. Biodegradation of coffee pulp tannin by Penicillium verrucosum for production of tannase, statistical optimization and its application. Food Bioprod. Process. 2015, 94, 727–735.
  53. Azzaz, H.; Kholif, A.; El Tawab, A.A.; Khattab, M.; Murad, H.; Olafadehan, O. A newly developed tannase enzyme from Aspergillus terreus versus commercial tannase in the diet of lactating Damascus goats fed diet containing pomegranate peel. Livest. Sci. 2020, 241, 104228.
  54. Albuquerque, K.K.S.A.; Albuquerque, W.W.C.; Costa, R.M.P.B.; Batista, J.M.S.; Marques, D.A.V.; Bezerra, R.P.; Herculano, P.N.; Porto, A.L.F. Biotechnological potential of a novel tannase-acyl hydrolase from Aspergillus sydowii using waste coir residue: Aqueous two-phase system and chromatographic techniques. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2020, 23, 101453.
  55. Martins, I.M.; Macedo, G.A.; Macedo, J.A. Biotransformed grape pomace as a potential source of anti-inflammatory polyphenolics: Effects in Caco-2 cells. Food Biosci. 2020, 35, 100607.
  56. Natarajan, K.; Rajendran, A. Evaluation and optimization of food-grade tannin acyl hydrolase production by a probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum strain in submerged and solid state fermentation. Food Bioprod. Process. 2012, 90, 780–792.
  57. Selvaraj, S.; Natarajan, K.; Nowak, A.; Murty, V.R. Mathematical modeling and simulation of newly isolated Bacillus cereus M1GT for tannase production through semi-solid state fermentation with agriculture residue triphala. S. Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 2020.
  58. Teles, A.S.; Chávez, D.W.; Oliveira, R.A.; Bon, E.P.; Terzi, S.C.; Souza, E.F.; Gottschalk, L.M.; Tonon, R.V. Use of grape pomace for the production of hydrolytic enzymes by solid-state fermentation and recovery of its bioactive compounds. Food Res. Int. 2019, 120, 441–448.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology
Contributor MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Leonardo Sepúlveda
View Times: 1.3K
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 13 May 2021
Table of Contents
Academic Video Service
Feedback