Table 2 Comparison of starch production in different microalgae under batch culture mode with different ICDs and nutrient deprivation conditions
Strain | ICD (g L−1) | Culture setup and conditions | Starch inducer | Starch content (%DW) | Starch yield (g L−1) | Starch theoretical productivity (g L−1 day−1) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chlorella sp. AE10 | 0.1 | 350 mL tube PBR, 10% CO2, 1000 μmol m−1 s−1 continuous irradiance | –N (4.4 mM) | 60.5 | 1.21 | 0.73 | Cheng et al. (2017) |
Chlorella sp. AE10 | 0.1 | As above | –N (4.4 mM) | 56.9 | 1.42 | 0.71 | Yuan et al. (2018) |
Chlorella vulgaris Beijerinck CCALA924 | 0.1 | 300 mL glass cylinder PBR, 2% CO2, 780 μmol m−1 s−1 continuous irradiance | –N | 37 | 0.10 | 0.19 | Brányiková et al. (2011) |
0.1 | –P | 53 | 0.35 | 0.48 | |||
0.1 | –S | 60 | 0.62 | 0.74 | |||
0.5 | –S | 60 | 1.2 | 2.32 | |||
1.2 | –S | 55 | 1.8 | 3.41 | |||
1.8 | –S | 40 | 1.4 | 2.51 | |||
Chlorella vulgaris SAG 211-11b | 0.25 | 1.5 L flat panel PBR, 5% CO2, 1300 μmol m−1 s−1 continuous irradiance | –N | 28.9 | 0.17 | 0.25 | Carnovale et al. (2021) |
0.65 | –N | 15.0 | 0.17 | 0.42 | |||
Chlorella fusca | 1 | 2 L flat Roux bottle, 1.5% CO2, 120 μmol m−1 s−1 continuous irradiance | –N | 49 | 1.86 | 0.38 | Jerez et al. (2016) |
1 | –S | 45 | 2.03 | 0.47 | |||
Tetraselmis subcordiformis | 0.5 | 500 mL glass column PBR, 2–3% CO2, 100–200 μmol m−1 s−1 continuous irradiance | –N | 54.0 | 0.7 | 0.49 | Yao et al. (2012) |
0.5 | –S | 62.1 | 1.2 | 0.62 | |||
0.5 | –P | 44.1 | 1.1 | 0.21 | Yao et al. (2013a) | ||
1.0 | –P | 42.2 | 1.6 | 0.30 | |||
2.0 | –P | 28.7 | 1.3 | 0.19 | |||
3.0 | –P | 24.8 | 1.4 | 0.18 | |||
0.5 | –N + 3 mM P | 64.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | Yao et al. (2018) | ||
0.6 | –N + 12 mM NaHCO3 | 58.1 | 1.5 | 0.73 | Qi et al. (2019) | ||
1.1 | –N | 50.6 | 1.3 | 0.27 | This study | ||
1.1 | –N + 5 mM GABA | 68.4 | 2.0 | 0.45 | This study | ||
2.8 | –N | 54.2 | 2.1 | 0.38 | This study | ||
2.8 | –N + 2.5 mM GABA | 61.6 | 2.5 | 0.48 | This study |