Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.author
Rojas Tapias, Daniel  
dc.contributor.author
Ortíz Vera, Mabel  
dc.contributor.author
Rivera Botia, Diego Mauricio  
dc.contributor.author
Kloepper, Joseph  
dc.contributor.author
Bonilla, Ruth  
dc.date.available
2017-09-06T13:35:14Z  
dc.date.issued
2013-06  
dc.identifier.citation
Rojas Tapias, Daniel; Ortíz Vera, Mabel; Rivera Botia, Diego Mauricio; Kloepper, Joseph; Bonilla, Ruth; Evaluation of three methods for preservation of Azotobacter chroococcum and Azotobacter vinelandii; Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Facultad de Ciencias; Universitas Scientiarum; 18; 2; 6-2013; 129-139  
dc.identifier.issn
2027-1352  
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/23697  
dc.description.abstract
Because the use of bacteria for biotechnological processes requires maintaining their viability and genetic stability, preserving them becomes essential. Here, we evaluated three preservation methods for A. chroococcum C26 and A. vinelandii C27; preservation methods: cryopreservation and immobilization in dry polymers for 60 days, and freeze-drying for 30. We evaluated their efficiency by counting viable cells and measuring nitrogen fixation activity. Additionally, we assessed the effect of three protective agents for freeze-drying, three for cryopreservation, and four polymers. Freeze-drying proved the best technique to maintain viability and activity, followed by immobilization and cryopreservation. Bacterial nitrogen fixing ability remained unchanged using the freeze-drying method, and bacterial survival exceeded 80%; S/BSA was the best protective agent. Immobilization maintained bacterial survival over 80%, but nitrogen fixation was decreased by 20%. Lastly, cryopreservation resulted in a dramatic loss of viability for C26 (BSR approx. 70%), whereas C27 was well preserved. Nitrogen fixation for both strains decreased regardless of the cryoprotective agent used (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the success of Azotobacter preservation methods depend on the technique, the protective agent, and the strain used. Our results also indicated that freeze- drying using S/BSA is the best technique to preserve bacteria of this genus.  
dc.format
application/pdf  
dc.language.iso
eng  
dc.publisher
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Facultad de Ciencias  
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess  
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/  
dc.subject
Azotobacter  
dc.subject
Bacterial Preservation  
dc.subject
Cryopreservation  
dc.subject
Freeze-Drying  
dc.subject.classification
Bioprocesamiento Tecnológico, Biocatálisis, Fermentación  
dc.subject.classification
Biotecnología Industrial  
dc.subject.classification
INGENIERÍAS Y TECNOLOGÍAS  
dc.title
Evaluation of three methods for preservation of Azotobacter chroococcum and Azotobacter vinelandii  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article  
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo  
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion  
dc.date.updated
2017-09-04T14:27:44Z  
dc.journal.volume
18  
dc.journal.number
2  
dc.journal.pagination
129-139  
dc.journal.pais
Colombia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Rojas Tapias, Daniel. Corporación Colombia de Investigación Agropecuaria; Colombia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Ortíz Vera, Mabel. Corporación Colombia de Investigación Agropecuaria; Colombia  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Rivera Botia, Diego Mauricio. Corporación Colombia de Investigación Agropecuaria; Colombia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Kloepper, Joseph. Auburn University; Estados Unidos  
dc.description.fil
Fil: Bonilla, Ruth. Corporación Colombia de Investigación Agropecuaria; Colombia  
dc.journal.title
Universitas Scientiarum  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.SC18-2.etmp  
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/scientarium/article/view/4404