ptt 302 downstream processing technology semester 1...

36
PTT 302 DOWNSTREAM PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY SEMESTER 1 2013/2014 Lecture 2: Cell Lysis

Upload: trankhanh

Post on 18-Apr-2018

225 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

TRANSCRIPT

PTT 302 DOWNSTREAM

PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY

SEMESTER 1 2013/2014

Lecture 2:

Cell Lysis

Overview

Selection of a cell disruption method depends

completely on the cell type

A wide variety of methods for breaking, or lysing

cells and tissues, broadly classified as ―chemical‖

and ―physical‖ methods

Cell breakage

MECHANICALNON=MECHANICAL

Shear in liquidsuspension

Shear in frozensuspension

Dessication Lysis

MechanicalAgitation

SuddenPressureChange

Ultrasound

Sudden PressureChange

Grinding

Physical Chemical Enzymatic

Classification of Cell Disruption

Elements of Cell Structure

Prokaryotic Cell

Do not contain a membrane-enclosed nucleus are classified as either

Eubacteria (commonly called bacteria) and Archaea.

The characteristics of cell envelops vary with type. The envelop

generally consists of a cytoplasmic membrane (plasma membrane) and

a cell wall

The membrane composed primarily of proteins and lipids maintains

concentration gradients while the wall provides the main mechanical

strength

The bacterial cell wall protects the plasma membrane and the cytoplasm

from osmotic stress (Fig 2.1 and 2.2)

Figure 2.1: Diagrammatic representations of the structural features

of the surfaces of (a) gram-positive (b) gram-negative bacteria. The

membrane is also called the plasma membrane of the cytoplasmic

membrane

Figure 2.2: (a) Phospholipid molecule and its outline. (b) Cell plasma

membrane formed by phospholipids with their polar head groups in

contact with aqueous phases.

Elements of Cell Structure (cont‘d)

Eukaryotic cells (cells with nuclei and internal

organelles)

More complicated than prokaryotic cells and

Bioproducts may have to be released from intracellular particles –

coated with membranes and/or consist of large macromolecular

aggregates

All cell membranes (including those of bacteria) as a separate,

immiscible, liquid phase relative to the rest of the cell

animal cells do not have a cell wall while the cell wall in plants is very

thick

The cell membrane of animal cells is easily broken whereas the cell wall

of plants is strong and relatively difficult to break (fig 2.3)

Figure 2.3: Eukaryotic cells. Simplified diagrammatic representation

Of an animal cell and a plant cell. The lysates of such cells contain the

internal structures (organelles) shown.

Cell Lysis

Two principal means of lysing cells to obtain their contents: chemical cell lysis and physical destruction via mechanical force

Changes in osmotic pressure - involve modification of a chemical potential that actually results in a mechanical force

Surfactants and enzymes added to a cell suspension act by dissolving a portion of the cell membrane and/or cell wall

Because chemical lysis conditions are detrimental to some bioproducts- sometimes necessary to use pure physical force methods

The various cell lysis methods are categorized in Table 2.1

TABLE 2.1:

CELL DISINTEGRATION TECHNIQUES

Osmotic and Chemical Cell Lysis

Every cell membrane maintains a substantial osmotic gradient;

however a drastic reduction in extracellular concentration of

solute will tend to burst cells (such as animal cells and protoplasts)

If the transmembrane osmotic pressure is due to solute

concentration inside the cell and out, the van‘t Hoff law can be

used to estimate this pressure, which applies to ideal, dilute

solutions:

where

π = osmotic transmembrane pressure

R = gas constant

T = absolute temperature (K)

ci – c0 = difference btw total solute molarity inside and

outside the cell

)( oi ccRT

Chemical Cell Lysis (cont‘d)

Bacterial and plant cells are protected against

osmotic lysis by cell walls

The weakening or partial destruction of these walls

can be achieved with chemical agents (detergents,

chelators, enzymes, solvents)

Chemical Cell Lysis – Enzymes and

Antibiotics

A number of enzymes which hydrolyse specific bonds in cell walls of a limited number of microorganisms

These enzymes are including lysozyme and enzyme extracts from leucocytes, Streptomyces spp., Micromonospora spp., Penicillium spp.

In theory, selective enzyme rupture is ideal but costs are high and the presence of the enzymes may complicate further downstream purification processes

These methods - not widely used on a large scale, with the exception of lysozyme

May be used as a pretreatment to partially hydrolyse cell walls prior to cell disruption by mechanical methods

Chemical Cell Lysis - Solvents

Usually used to lyse cells, especially eukaryotes

For example, acetone – often used early in the preparations of biochemicals from animal tissue homogenates.

It dissolves cell membranes as well as excess fat and at appropriate concentrations may aid in precipitating the product if that is desirable

A number of detergents will damage the lipoproteins of the microbial cell membrane and lead to release of intracellular components

For example - quaternary ammonium compounds, sodium lauryl sulphate, sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS) and Triton X-100

Unfortunately, detergents may cause some protein denaturation and may need to be removed before further purification stages

The use of Triton X-100 in combination with guanidine-HCl is widely and effectively used for the release of cellular protein (Naglak and Wang, 1992; Hettwer and Wang, 1989)

Gram-negative microorganisms

Use of chelating

agents

The most common, EDTA which binds the divalent cations

Mg2+ and Ca2+

EDTA destabilizes the outer membrane of gram-negative

microorganisms which contains lipopolysaccharide (LPS),

exposing the underlying peptidoglycan layer

The inner membrane is apparently not affected by

treatment with just EDTA

Divalent cations either Mg2+ and Ca2+, stabilize the

structure of the outer leaflet by binding LPS molecules to

each other as well as to outer-membrane proteins

When EDTA removes the divalent cations from the outer

membrane, a large portion of LPS molecules are also

removed

Gram-negative microorganisms

Use of solvent Toluene, organic solvent is probably acts by dissolving inner-

membrane phospholipids

Other solvents, ether – permeabilize E.Coli cells for study of

DNA synthesis. This procedure is apparently specific for small

molecules

Use of

detergents

Both anionic and nonionic detergents have been used to

permeabilize gram-negative microbial cells

The anionic sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) at a conc. of

0.05% released 24% of intracellular protein, 35% of

intracellular RNA and 22% of intracellular DNA from E.Coli

(Woldringh, 1970)

The nonionic detergent: Triton X-100

The main location of detergent action in gram-negative

microorganisms seems to be the inner membrane

Use of chaotropic

agents

Example: Guanidine and urea are capable of

bringing some normally hydrophobic compounds into

aqueous solution

They accomplish this by disrupting the structure of

water, making it a less hydrophilic environment and

weakening the hydrophobic interactions among solute

molecules

Yeast

Use of solvent Toluene is used to permeabilize yeast cells for in situ

enzymatic assays and in this case the structure of the

cells is left intact and the enzyme activity remain inside

Proteins can also be removed from yeast by toluene

under appropriate conditions (higher concentrations and

higher temperatures) although the cells tend to dissolve

rather than permeabilize

Use of detergents Triton X-100 has been used to permeabilize yeast cells

for enzymatic assays

Mechanical Method of Cell Lysis

The disruption of microorganism – often required in the

large-scale production of microbial products such as

enzymes, toxins and diagnostic or therapeutic proteins

The ideal technology for cell disruption may be

characterized by:

Max. release of the product of interest

No mechanical or thermal denaturation of the product

during disruption

Min. release of proteases which may degrade the product

Min. release of particulates or soluble contaminants that

may influence downstream processing

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers

A homogeniser consists of a positive-displacement

pump, which this high-pressure pump incorporates an

adjustable valve with restricted orifice through which

cells are forced at pressures up to 550atm (Fig. 2.4 a

& b)

General applicability for cell disruption although the

homogenizing valve can become blocked when used

with highly filamentous organisms

Q: What are the factors which you believe will influence

the efficiency of the homogenizer for disrupting cells?

Figure 2.4a: Details of a high pressure (Manton—Gaulin) homogenizer valve: A, handwheel for adjusting pressure; B, spring-driven valve rod; C, valve (see Figure 2.6); D valve seat (also see Fig. 2.6); and E. impact ring of hard material. The ring E is sometimes eroded by the impact of cells and debris, which can be abrasive.

Figure 2.4b: Cell disruption in a high-pressure homogenizer.

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers - Influence

of Pressure

Cell disruption follows first-order kinetics as first described by Hetrington et. al. by the equation:

Where:

Rm = max. protein release or enzyme activity;

R = measured protein release or enzyme activity after N passes

k = a first order dimensionless rate constant (1/s)

N = number of passes

∆P = pressure drop across valve seat

x = is highly dependent on the type of cell and the conditions under which the cells were grown

x

m

m PKkkN,RR

Rlog

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers -

Influence of Pressure (cont‘d)

The dimensionless rate constant (K) – principally a

function of pressure drop across the valve seat (∆P)

The constant (K) – a function of temperature and in

some instances, cell concentration

The first order expression implies that the rate of

rupture at any time is dependent on the proportion

of cells remaining undisrupted

Subsequently, it was confirmed that the rate

constant K depends on the organism

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers -

Influence of Pressure (cont‘d)

Most applications operate within the range of 500-1000 bar

The max. allowable operating pressure is often dictated by the mechanical stability of the valve design – may due to design or material of construction

Microorganism K

Pseudomonas putida 0.41

Eschericia coli 0.39

Bacillus brevis 0.28

Saccharomyces cerevisiae 0.23

Nocardia rhodochrous 0.0085

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers -

Influence of Homogenizer Valve

Valve Seat Geometry

Valve design and selection optimize the influence of

shear and impingement on cell disruption

Operational factors such as temp and pressure stability

may also influence selection (Fig. 2.6)

Figure 2.6: Configuration of high pressure homogenizer

valves used in Manton—Gaulin homogenizers

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers -

Influence of Temperature

The rate of cell disruption increases with temperature

In selecting the inlet temperature for a homogenizer – one must

consider both the temp rise that occurs during processing and the

max allowable temp of the product

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers - Cell

Physiological Factors

The amount of disruption that can be achieved in a single pass is

a function of the type of organism and its physiological state as

well as the homogenizer operating conditions.

There are wide differences in the susceptibility of different

types of organisms to disruption, but there does not appear to

be a general correlation between difficulty of disruption and

organism classification (e.g., bacteria or yeast) (Engler and

Robinson, 1981b).

Results from disruption studies indicate that cells grown at a high

specific growth rate are more easily disrupted than cells of the

same organism grown at a lower rate on the same medium.

High Pressure Cell Homogenizers –

Other Factors

Another factor that has been shown to affect disruption

characteristics of cells is the composition of the growth medium

(Gray et a 1972).

Other environmental factors that can affect cell growth, such as

aeration, pH and temperature, may also alter the susceptibility

of cells to disruption, although they have not been studied.

Bead Mills – Principle of Operation

Originally, devised as pigment mills, they may be used for cell rupture

Bead mills use a horizontal, jacketed grinding chamber filled with grinding media, such as glass beads (Figure 2.7)

A cell slurry is introduced into the supply side of the chamber on a continuous basis

Kinetic energy is imparted to the beads by a variable speed shaft equipped with multiple discs – leads to cell disruption through the combined forces of cavitation, generation of high shear forces, grinding between the beads and by direct collision with the beads

Figure 2.7:Horizontal bead mill

Bead Mills – Principle of Operation

(cont‘d) The cell homogenate – then separated from the grinding

media by mechanical means using an annular disc

Heat dissipation – removed by passing cooling water or refrigerant through the jacket

As with the high-pressure homogeniser, disruption (followed by the release of soluble protein) can be represented by a first-order rate equations:

where: Rm = max protein release R = protein release after N passes k = a first order rate constant (1/s) N = no. of passes t = mean residence time (s0 per pass

kNt RR

R

m

mlog

Bead Mills – Principle of Operation

(cont‘d)

The ratio of heat transfer area to the mill volume

can be expressed as follows:

where:

T = cylinder/chamber diameter (m)

L = length of bead mill (m)

T

4

LT4

π

πTL

(V)millvolume

a(A)surfaceareL

2

Bead Mills – Principle of Operation

(cont‘d) The power input (P):

where :

c = dimensionless constant

ρ = suspension density (kg/m3)

N = rotational speed of the impeller (s-1)

D = impeller diameter (m)

‗c‘ depends on the type of flow in the mill (laminar or turbulent) and the type of impeller

The main problem in the scaling up of bead mills – the removal of the energy dissipated in the broth

Increasing the impeller diameter – result in a considerable increase in power input (at constant speed)

53DNcP

Advantages and disadvantages of homogenisers

and bead mill

Advantages

Homogeniser Bead Mill

1. More flexible with regard to cell types 1. May achieve disruption in a single pass

2. Requires less maintenance 2. Better temperature distribution and

control

3. No process stream contamination 3. Single pass often sufficient

4. Brief residence time 4. Aerosol generation is minimized

Disadvantages

1. Aerosol generation 1. Difficult to clean and sterilize

2. Heat generation may lead to

denaturation

2. Broad residence time distribution

3. Multiple-pass operation is standard 3. Introduces colloidal silica into

homogenate from abrasion

4. Performance and capacity varies

greatly with cell type