Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology ›› 2023, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (8): 225-233.DOI: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2022.0430
• INNOVATIVE METHODS AND TECHNOLOGIES • Previous Articles
Qi LI(), Shulin ZHANG, Dajuan ZHANG(
), Yingxuan JIA, Zebin WANG
Received:
2022-05-23
Accepted:
2022-07-23
Online:
2023-08-20
Published:
2023-09-07
Contact:
Dajuan ZHANG
通讯作者:
张达娟
作者简介:
李琦 E-mail:lqdengdeng@163.com;
基金资助:
CLC Number:
Qi LI, Shulin ZHANG, Dajuan ZHANG, Yingxuan JIA, Zebin WANG. Optimization of Culture Medium of Chaetoceros muelleri by Response Surface Methodology[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(8): 225-233.
李琦, 张树林, 张达娟, 贾滢暄, 王泽斌. 响应面法改良牟氏角毛藻培养基[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(8): 225-233.
营养盐 Nutrient | 质量浓度 Mass concentration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
硝酸钠 NaNO3 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 |
磷酸二氢钠 NaH2PO4·H2O | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 |
硅酸钠 Na2SiO3 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 50 | 100 | 200 | 500 |
柠檬酸铁铵 C6H8FeNO7 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 |
Table 1 Single factor level of nutrients
营养盐 Nutrient | 质量浓度 Mass concentration | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
硝酸钠 NaNO3 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 30 | 40 | 50 | 60 |
磷酸二氢钠 NaH2PO4·H2O | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 |
硅酸钠 Na2SiO3 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 50 | 100 | 200 | 500 |
柠檬酸铁铵 C6H8FeNO7 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 |
水平 Level | 因素 Factor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
A:硝酸钠 NaNO3 | B:磷酸二氢钠 NaH2PO4 ·H2O | C:硅酸钠 Na2SiO3 | D:柠檬酸铁铵 C6H8FeNO7 | |
-1 | 10 | 1 | 20 | 0.1 |
0 | 20 | 2 | 50 | 0.3 |
1 | 30 | 3 | 80 | 0.5 |
Table 2 Box Behnken experimental factor level
水平 Level | 因素 Factor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
A:硝酸钠 NaNO3 | B:磷酸二氢钠 NaH2PO4 ·H2O | C:硅酸钠 Na2SiO3 | D:柠檬酸铁铵 C6H8FeNO7 | |
-1 | 10 | 1 | 20 | 0.1 |
0 | 20 | 2 | 50 | 0.3 |
1 | 30 | 3 | 80 | 0.5 |
Fig. 1 Growth of Chaetoceros muelleri with different nutrient speciesNote:Different lowercase letter of same index indicate the significant difference between treatments at P<0.05 level.
编号 Number | 因素 Factor | 密度 Density/(104 cell·mL-1) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | ||
1 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 551.62 |
2 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 418.96 |
3 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 526.07 |
4 | 0 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 494.49 |
5 | 0 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 495.8 |
6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 557.98 |
7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 514.89 |
8 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 510.47 |
9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 513.83 |
10 | -1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 453.45 |
11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 573.33 |
12 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 492.02 |
13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 571.92 |
14 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 447.57 |
15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 559.34 |
16 | 0 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 532.82 |
17 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 500.08 |
18 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 515.38 |
19 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 468.55 |
20 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 479.73 |
21 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 439.22 |
22 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 521.65 |
23 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 518.83 |
24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 508.63 |
25 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 458.31 |
26 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 518.83 |
27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 560.75 |
28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 549.04 |
29 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 520.43 |
Table 3 Experimental results of response surface method
编号 Number | 因素 Factor | 密度 Density/(104 cell·mL-1) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | ||
1 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 551.62 |
2 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 418.96 |
3 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 526.07 |
4 | 0 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 494.49 |
5 | 0 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 495.8 |
6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 557.98 |
7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 514.89 |
8 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 510.47 |
9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 513.83 |
10 | -1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 453.45 |
11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 573.33 |
12 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 492.02 |
13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 571.92 |
14 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 447.57 |
15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 559.34 |
16 | 0 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 532.82 |
17 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 500.08 |
18 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 515.38 |
19 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 468.55 |
20 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 479.73 |
21 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 439.22 |
22 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 521.65 |
23 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 518.83 |
24 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 508.63 |
25 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 458.31 |
26 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 518.83 |
27 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 560.75 |
28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 549.04 |
29 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 520.43 |
方差来源 Variance sources | 平方和 Sum of squares | 自由度 Degree of freedom | 均方 Mean squares | F值 F value | P值 P value | 显著性 Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型Model | 44 720.85 | 14 | 3 194.35 | 29.89 | <0.000 1 | ** |
A-A | 11 797.01 | 1 | 11 797.01 | 110.39 | <0.000 1 | ** |
B-B | 575.47 | 1 | 575.47 | 5.38 | 0.035 9 | * |
C-C | 878.77 | 1 | 878.77 | 8.22 | 0.012 4 | * |
D-D | 322.61 | 1 | 322.61 | 3.02 | 0.104 2 | |
AB | 258.41 | 1 | 258.41 | 2.42 | 0.142 3 | |
AC | 704.90 | 1 | 704.90 | 6.60 | 0.022 3 | * |
AD | 12.74 | 1 | 12.74 | 0.119 3 | 0.735 0 | |
BC | 730.62 | 1 | 730.62 | 6.84 | 0.020 4 | * |
BD | 1 021.76 | 1 | 1 021.76 | 9.56 | 0.008 0 | ** |
CD | 1 962.93 | 1 | 1 962.93 | 18.37 | 0.000 8 | ** |
A2 | 22 529.99 | 1 | 22 529.99 | 210.81 | <0.000 1 | ** |
B2 | 1 679.08 | 1 | 1 679.08 | 15.71 | 0.001 4 | ** |
C2 | 6 714.11 | 1 | 6 714.11 | 62.82 | <0.000 1 | ** |
D2 | 4 466.73 | 1 | 4 466.73 | 41.80 | <0.000 1 | ** |
残差Residual | 1 496.19 | 14 | 106.87 | |||
失拟项Lack of fit | 1 280.10 | 10 | 128.01 | 2.37 | 0.210 5 | |
纯误差Pure error | 216.09 | 4 | 54.02 | |||
总和 Cor total | 46 217.04 | 28 |
Table 4 Analysis of variance of regression model
方差来源 Variance sources | 平方和 Sum of squares | 自由度 Degree of freedom | 均方 Mean squares | F值 F value | P值 P value | 显著性 Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
模型Model | 44 720.85 | 14 | 3 194.35 | 29.89 | <0.000 1 | ** |
A-A | 11 797.01 | 1 | 11 797.01 | 110.39 | <0.000 1 | ** |
B-B | 575.47 | 1 | 575.47 | 5.38 | 0.035 9 | * |
C-C | 878.77 | 1 | 878.77 | 8.22 | 0.012 4 | * |
D-D | 322.61 | 1 | 322.61 | 3.02 | 0.104 2 | |
AB | 258.41 | 1 | 258.41 | 2.42 | 0.142 3 | |
AC | 704.90 | 1 | 704.90 | 6.60 | 0.022 3 | * |
AD | 12.74 | 1 | 12.74 | 0.119 3 | 0.735 0 | |
BC | 730.62 | 1 | 730.62 | 6.84 | 0.020 4 | * |
BD | 1 021.76 | 1 | 1 021.76 | 9.56 | 0.008 0 | ** |
CD | 1 962.93 | 1 | 1 962.93 | 18.37 | 0.000 8 | ** |
A2 | 22 529.99 | 1 | 22 529.99 | 210.81 | <0.000 1 | ** |
B2 | 1 679.08 | 1 | 1 679.08 | 15.71 | 0.001 4 | ** |
C2 | 6 714.11 | 1 | 6 714.11 | 62.82 | <0.000 1 | ** |
D2 | 4 466.73 | 1 | 4 466.73 | 41.80 | <0.000 1 | ** |
残差Residual | 1 496.19 | 14 | 106.87 | |||
失拟项Lack of fit | 1 280.10 | 10 | 128.01 | 2.37 | 0.210 5 | |
纯误差Pure error | 216.09 | 4 | 54.02 | |||
总和 Cor total | 46 217.04 | 28 |
Fig. 7 Maximum light energy conversion efficiency of experimental group and control groupNote:* and ** indicate significant difference compared with the control at P<0.05 and P<0.01 levels,respectively.
1 | 李志军,薛长湖,林洪.微藻中的活性物质及其保健食品的研究与开发[J].山东商业职业技术学院学报,2003,3(2):75-76. |
2 | 梁英,黄徐林,田传远,等.海洋药源微藻研究进展[J].中国海洋大学学报,2016,46(11):32-43. |
LIANG Y, HUANG X L, TIAN C Y, et al.. Advances in studies on marine medicinal microalgae [J]. J. Ocean Univ. China,2016,46(11):32-43. | |
3 | 赵子续,曲木,张宝龙,等.饲料中添加多种微藻对锦鲤生长、体色及抗氧化指标的影响[J].养殖与饲料,2021,20(5):9-16. |
4 | MOHSENI A, FAN L H, RODDICK F A. Impact of microalgae species and solution salinity on algal treatment of wastewater reverse osmosis concentrate [J/OL]. Chemosphere,2021,285:131487[2022-04-22]. . |
5 | 胡一丞,吴悦,陆丰逸,等.牟氏角毛藻与微拟球藻、青岛大扁藻混合培养技术的初步研究[J].当代水产,2016,41(6):77-78. |
6 | 朱昔恩,黎大勇,熊建华,等.接种密度、氮、磷、碳、硅、维生素对牟氏角毛藻生长的影响[J].普洱学院学报,2018,34(6):9-14. |
ZHU X E, LI D Y, XIONG J H, et al.. Effects of salinity, temperature and light on the growth of Chaetoceros muelleri from the coast of Guangxi [J]. J. Puer Univ., 2018,34(6):9-14. | |
7 | 林权卓,吴悦,陆丰逸,等.牟氏角毛藻规模化培育过程中营养因子的筛选[J].科学养鱼,2016(10):50-51. |
8 | 张贵杰,孟二力.不同氮源对牟氏角毛藻增殖的影响[J].河北渔业,2006(2):25-26. |
9 | 于瑾,蒋霞敏,梁洪,等.氮、磷、铁对牟氏角毛藻生长速率的影响[J].水产科学,2006(3):121-124. |
YU J, JIANG X M, LIANG H, et al.. Influence of nitrogen, phosphorus and iron nutrition on the growth rate of Chaetoceros muelleri [J]. Fisheries Sci., 2006(3):121-124. | |
10 | 褚以文.微生物培养基优化方法及其OPTI优化软件[J].国外医药(抗生素分册),1999,20(2):58-60, 66. |
11 | 郝学财,余晓斌,刘志钰,等.响应面方法在优化微生物培养基中的应用[J].食品研究与开发,2006,27(1):38-41. |
HAO X C, YU X B, LIU Z Y, et al.. The application of response surface methodology in optimization of microbial media [J]. Food Res. Dev., 2006,27(1):38-41. | |
12 | 王立原.响应面法在结构优化应用上的研究[D]. 上海:上海海洋大学,2018. |
WANG L Y. The response surface method in structural optimization study on the application [D]. Shanghai : Shanghai Ocean University,2018. | |
13 | 孙晓富,董超,李文静,等.响应面法优化纳豆芽孢杆菌发酵制备多肽螯合钙工艺[J].中国酿造,2021,40(6):119-123. |
SUN X F, DONG C, LI W J, et al.. Optimization of preparation process of peptides chelated calcium from Bacillus natto fermentation by response surface methodology [J]. China Brewing,2021,40(6):119-123. | |
14 | 宋立立,李志国.响应面法优化枯草芽孢杆菌产蛋白酶的发酵条件[J].饲料研究,2020,43(7):81-85. |
SONG L L, LI Z G. Optimization of fermentation conditions for protease production by Bacillus subtilis using response surface methodology [J]. Feed Res., 2020,43(7):81-85. | |
15 | 马若欣,王学魁,曹春晖.氮浓度和光照强度对小新月菱形藻生长和总脂含量的影响[J].天津科技大学学报,2009,24(3):31-34. |
MA R X, WANG X K, CAO C H. Effects of nitrate concentrations and light intensity on the growth and total lipid contents of Nitzschia Closterium f.minutissima [J]. J. Tianjin Univ. Sci. Technol., 2009,24(3):31-34. | |
16 | 张力.底栖硅藻的规模化培养及其在刺参育苗中的应用[D]. 扬州: 扬州大学,2013. |
ZHANG L. Large-scale culture of benthic diatoms and its application to the breeding of the sea cucumber Apostichopus japonicus [D]. Yangzhou :Yangzhou University,2013. | |
17 | 张国庆,邓湘云,李建保,等.氮、磷、铁、硅营养盐对牟氏角毛藻生长的影响[J].河北渔业,2013(3):8-11. |
ZHANG G Q, DENG X Y, LI J B, et al.. Effects of nitrogen, phosphorus, iron and silicon on the growth of Chaetoceros muelleri [J]. Hebei Fisheries,2013(3):8-11. | |
18 | SHIFRIN N S, CHISHOLM S W. Phytoplankton lipids: inter specific differences and effects of nitrate, silicate and light-dark cycles [J]. J. Phycol.,1981,17(4):374-384. |
19 | 如扎·哈布都拉,王萍,王阳,等.Box-Behnken响应面法优化阿里红总多糖水提醇沉工艺[J].化学与生物工程,2020,37(3):29-36. |
Ruzha·Habudula WANG P, WANG Y, et al.. Optimization of water extraction and alcohol precipitation process of fomes of ficinalis ames total polysaccharide with Box-Behnken response surface methodology [J]. Chem. Bioeng.,2020,37(3):29-36. | |
20 | 许天阳,董坤园,宋凤媛,等.Box-Behnken响应面法优化炒赤芍炮制工艺[J].中国药房,2019,30(20):2845-2850. |
XU T Y, DONG K Y, SONG F Y, et al.. Optimization of processing technology of fried radix paeoniae by Box-Behnken response surface method [J]. China Pharmacy, 2019,30(20):2845-2850. | |
21 | 李莉,张赛,何强,等.响应面法在试验设计与优化中的应用[J].试验室研究与探索,2015,34(8):41-45. |
LI L, ZHANG S, HE Q, et al.. Application of response surface methodology in experiment design and optimization [J]. Res. Exploration Laboratory,2015,34(8):41-45. |
[1] | Chenyang ZHANG, Minggang XU, Fei WANG, Ran LI, Nan SUN. Effects of Manure Application on Soybean Yield and Soil Nutrients in China [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(8): 148-156. |
[2] | Caiyan DU, Haiyan LU, Yanzhu XIONG, Xi SUN, Xiumei SUN, Jixiong PU, Naiming ZHANG. Effects of Combined Application of Biogas Slurry and Chemical Fertilizer on Peach Growth and Soil Physical and Chemical Properties for Two Consecutive Years [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(8): 165-175. |
[3] | Rui XIAO, Lu TAN, Liang WU, Hao ZHANG, Jiayuan GUO, Haijun YANG. Microbial Community Structure and Diversity in Rhizosphere and Non-rhizosphere Soil of Kochia scoparia Under Cd Stress [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(8): 203-215. |
[4] | Xiuying ZHAO, Qingwen HUANG, Haojie CAO, Jie WANG, Ruijiao LI, Dongxia NIE, Zheng HAN, Zhihui ZHAO. Optimization of Liquid Culture Conditions for the Production of Deoxynivalenol and Its Derivatives by Fusarium graminearum Using Response Surface Methodology [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(7): 222-233. |
[5] | Yilin YANG, Junxiong DING, Xiaohua WU, Peng WANG, Dongliang SUN, Xinyao YU, Zhentao ZHANG, Dong LI. Optimization of Hot-air Drying Process Parameters of Lentinus edodes Based on Response Surface [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(6): 154-164. |
[6] | Hongyuan LIU, Zhihua ZHOU, Guangxin ZHAO, Yanjun WANG, Nana WANG. Effects of Modified Cellulose on Germination and Dryland Soil Physicochemical Properties of Upland Rice [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(5): 168-175. |
[7] | Fenfang XIAO, Conghe ZHANG, Hui WANG, Yafeng YE, Daolin ZHANG, Heting WANG, Bo LI, Yuejin WU, Binmei LIU. Simulation and Optimization of Pneumatic Conveying System for Hybrid Rice Pollen Collection Device [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(4): 110-122. |
[8] | Jia YAO, Jiaxin LIU, Yan SU, Xiaojuan SU. Effects of Combined Application of Tobacco Stem Biochar and Nitrogen Fertilizers on Corn Growth and Soil Properties in Seeding Stage [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(3): 140-151. |
[9] | Tingting NIE, Yiqiang DONG, Helong YANG, Asitaiken Julihaiti, Shijie ZHOU, Shazhou AN. Effects of Enclosure on Plant and Soil Stoichiometric Characteristics in an Artemisia Desert [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(3): 178-187. |
[10] | Yunzhu ZHENG, Shuchen SUN. Effects of Straw Biochar and Straw on Soil Nutrients and Crop Yield in Wheat-Maize Rotation System [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(2): 152-162. |
[11] | Yudan ZHANG, Weimin WANG, Bo NI, Xiaohan MA, Junling LI, Zicheng XU, Wei JIA, Jiuchang SHI. Extraction Optimization of Chlorogenic Acid from Tobacco Stalk and Its Antifungal Effect [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2023, 25(1): 119-127. |
[12] | Chuang LU, Haitang HU, Yuan QIN, Heju HUAI, Cunjun LI. Delineating Management Zones in Spring Maize Field Based on UAV Multispectral Image [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2022, 24(9): 106-115. |
[13] | Jinrong LI, Tong ZHOU, Yiqi LIN, Zuohua HUANG, Liangjing SHENG, Feiping ZHANG, Songqing WU. Optimization of Serratia marcescens BRC-CXG2 Fermentation Medium Based on Response Surface Methodology [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2022, 24(8): 133-143. |
[14] | Quanquan WEI, Ying GAO, Jiulan GOU, Meng ZHANG, Yong RAO, Bin YANG, Di FAN, Wenhao FENG, Huagui XIAO. Effects of Different Sowing Rates and Sowing Methods on the Nutrient Absorption, Utilization and Yield of Winter Rapeseed in Yellow Soil [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2022, 24(8): 182-191. |
[15] | Kuiyuan CHEN, Hui LIU, Wei DING. Effect of Glyphosate on Soil Nutrient and the Functional Enzyme Activities in Soybean Fields [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2022, 24(5): 180-188. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||