• English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
    Communities & Collections
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Српски
  • Yкраї́нська
  • New user? Click here to register. Have you forgotten your password?
SUAIRE
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Gidamis, A.B."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Results Per Page
  • Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparative evaluation of different methods of extraction and purification used in technical enzyme production from microorganisms
    (1998) Gidamis, A.B.; Nnko, S.A.; Shayo, N.B.; Chove, B.E.; Kroner, H. K.
    A stlldy was conducted to compare the efficiency of two methods of microbial cell separation and enzyme purification using penicillin-G-acylase (PGA) from Escherichia coli. The efficiency of two methods of ceJ[ separation; centrifugation and cross flow filtration (CFF) were compared. The CFF method was found to have both higher separation efficiency and enzyme yield than centrifugation method. Centrifugation method gave a separation efficiency of 98.5% with enzyme yield of94 % whereas CFFmethod resulted in 100% separation efficiency and enzyme yield of98.8%. The Escherichia coli cells were disrupted by high pressure homogenization (HPH),and the disrupted cells were purified using two different techniques. Technique I was a combination of cross-flow-diafiltration (CFD) , ultrafiltration (UF) and heat/pH-shift treatments. This technique resulted in 47% enzyme yield with a purification factor of 12. Technique II which involved two extraction steps by' aqueous two - phase system (APS) coupled with UF resulted in 62 % enzyme yield with a pu;ificationfactor of 4. Technique I was therefore much better than techriique Il in purifying the enzyme. For higher enzyme yield, technique II would seem to be a better one than technique I.

Sokoine University of Agriculture | Copyright © 2025 LYRASIS

  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback