Skip to main content

Carbon dioxide and trace oxygen concentrations impact growth and product formation of the gut bacterium Phocaeicola vulgatus

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

The promising yet barely investigated anaerobic species Phocaeicola vulgatus (formerly Bacteroides vulgatus) plays a vital role for human gut health and effectively produces organic acids. Among them is succinate, a building block for high-value-added chemicals. Cultivating anaerobic bacteria is challenging, and a detailed understanding of P. vulgatus growth and metabolism is required to improve succinate production. One significant aspect is the influence of different gas concentrations. CO2 is required for the growth of P. vulgatus. However, it is a greenhouse gas that should not be wasted. Another highly interesting aspect is the sensitivity of P. vulgatus towards O2. In this work, the effects of varying concentrations of both gases were studied in the in-house developed Respiratory Activity MOnitoring System (RAMOS), which provides online monitoring of CO2, O2, and pressure under gassed conditions. The RAMOS was combined with a gas mixing system to test CO2 and O2 concentrations in a range of 0.25-15.0 vol% and 0.0-2.5 vol%, respectively.

Results

Changing the CO2 concentration in the gas supply revealed a CO2 optimum of 3.0 vol% for total organic acid production and 15.0 vol% for succinate production. It was demonstrated that the organic acid composition changed depending on the CO2 concentration. Furthermore, unrestricted growth of P. vulgatus up to an O2 concentration of 0.7 vol% in the gas supply was proven. The viability decreased rapidly at concentrations larger than or equal to 1.3 vol% O2.

Conclusions

The study showed that P. vulgatus requires little CO2, has a distinct O2 tolerance and is therefore well suited for industrial applications.

Peer Review reports

Background

The largest population of bacteria in the human body inhabits the intestine, with about 1011–12 organisms per mL of colonic contents [1, 2]. The bacterial microbiota of the intestine facilitates the maturation of the immune system, the development of the gut and protects against colonization by pathogens. It also supports the human metabolism by breaking down indigestible polysaccharides into nutrients, vitamins, co-factors, amino acids, and short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) [3,4,5]. The most common phylum in the human gut is Bacteroidota [2, 6]. Species of Bacteroidota achieve high yields of organic acids [7,8,9] and can be genetically modified [10, 11]. Phocaeicola vulgatus, initially classified as Bacteroides vulgatus [12], is one of the most abundant bacteria within the phylum of Bacteroidota [6]. Even though P. vulgatus has great potential as an industrial platform organism, it has not yet been used for biotechnological processes [10], because the species.

has not been sufficiently characterized in axenic culture. The cultivation of gut microbes is complex, as they are highly adapted to the gastrointestinal ecosystem [2, 13].

The gastrointestinal ecosystem is an environment that offers CO2 in abundance, as the gas is a by-product of anaerobic fermentation. The CO2 is then taken up by enterocytes or utilized by other microorganisms [14]. Another aspect of the intestine is the changing O2 level. The gut epithelium is supplied with O2 by the vasculature, and the bulk of the lumen is essentially anoxic [15]. Due to the O2 gradient, even strict anaerobic gut bacteria need response mechanisms, if they encounter higher O2 concentrations in the intestine or escape the gut environment. Species of Bacteroidota are classified as opportunistic pathogens with a broad range of oxygen tolerance, capable of infecting oxygenated tissues [2]. O2 can diffuse into the bacterial cells and inactivate enzymes with a radical in the active center [15]. Another common mechanism of O2-induced damage includes the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in the form of superoxide and hydrogen peroxide [16]. ROS are formed, when molecular O2 oxidizes reduced metals and thiols. Anaerobes protect themselves from ROS with the same defensive tactics initially identified in aerobes [15]. The arsenal of the genus Bacteroides against O2-induced damage contains e.g., peroxidases, rubrerythrins, and catalases [15]. In an oxygenated environment, Bacteroidota switch to a stationary-like state to protect themselves from damage by ROS. In this condition, the translation of biosynthesis genes is downregulated, and growth is impaired [17, 18]. Furthermore, on a transcriptional level, downregulation of potential ROS-producing enzymes, such as fumarate reductase, occurs [19]. Fumarate reductase is responsible for the reduction of fumarate to succinate in P. vulgatus [3]. The genetically related Bacteroides fragilis species can also express cytochrome bd oxidase [20]. In this way, O2 serves as a terminal electron acceptor in the respiratory chain. Ultimately, cytochrome bd oxidase can stimulate O2-dependent growth in micro-aerobic conditions.

The carbon metabolism is a significant aspect of a better understanding of P. vulgatus. One of the three glycolytic pathways is used in related Bacteroides to obtain phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP), a key metabolite in glycolysis. PEP is then converted to products such as organic acids and gases [3]. This conversion is done using anaerobic respiration and fermentation via oxaloacetate, malate, and fumarate [3]. Bacteroides use anaerobic respiration, since it is generally more efficient than fermentation [3]. The main products of the anaerobic respiration of Bacteroides are acetate, propionate, succinate, lactate, formate, CO2, and H2 [3]. The high CO2 levels in the gut are advantageous for anaerobic respiration [3]. Thereby, Bacteroides can establish a primitive electron transport chain based on reducing fumarate to succinate [3]. As a result, CO2 is fixed to fumarate, and the bacterium can regenerate CO2 from succinate under CO2-limiting conditions [3]. Through this process, propionate can be produced [3]. Additionally, lactate is formed by reducing pyruvate via lactate dehydrogenase [10]. Prevotella copri, another P. vulgatus-related species, can convert pyruvate to formate, CO2, Fdred (possible site for hydrogen formation), and acetyl-CoA, which is converted in the next step to acetate [21].

The SCFAs acetate, propionate, succinate, formate, and lactate, a short-chain hydroxy fatty acid, denoted as an SCFA in this study, are the main products of P. vulgatus. SCFAs are important for gut microbes, to regulate the production of redox equivalents in the anaerobic environment of the intestine [22]. Moreover, SCFAs benefit the human host and serve as signal molecules or energy substrates [23, 24]. Currently, most SCFAs for the chemical industry are produced based on fossil fuels. However, as Bacteroidota produce numerous SCFAs, there is the potential for a sustainable production.

Although only limited efforts for characterization of P. vulgatus in terms of CO2 requirement and O2 tolerance have been conducted so far, Franke and Deppenmeier [21] and Reilly [25] have shown that P. vulgatus requires CO2 or bicarbonate supplementation for growth. However, as the study of Franke and Deppenmeier [21] focused on P. copri, they found a more pronounced CO2 dependency of P. copri, compared to P. vulgatus. Furthermore, Baughn and Malamy [20] stated that P. vulgatus could cope with oxygen concentrations of 0.03 vol% without suffering damage. However, the optimum CO2 level and maximal oxygen tolerance still need to be unraveled.

This study aims to advance the characterization of P. vulgatus under anaerobic cultivation conditions, determining the CO2 requirement and O2 tolerance for growth and organic acid production. The characterization was conducted utilizing the Respiration Activity MOnitoring System (RAMOS). The RAMOS is a small-scale shaken cultivation system that, in contrast to traditional serum flasks, allows for non-invasive online measurement of CO2, O2, and pressure [26,27,28]. Furthermore, the influence of different gas concentrations was determined by combining the RAMOS with a gas mixing system. Thereby, up to four different gas streams were supplied to the RAMOS. This study determines the feasibility of P. vulgatus as an efficient organic acid producer under different influences of CO2 and O2.

Results

Influence of CO2 on growth and acid production

In the first set of experiments, the influence of different concentrations of CO2 in the gas supply on the cultivation of P. vulgatus in shake flasks was tested. During the experiments, the CO2 concentration in the gas supply varied between 0.25 and 15.0 vol% with the aid of the gas mixing system. For these cultivations, online gas transfer rates are depicted in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Effect of different CO2 concentrations on gas transfer rates of P. vulgatus shake flask cultivations. Online data of (a) carbon dioxide transfer rate (CTR) and (b) total gas transfer rate (TGTR). Shadows indicate standard deviations of four biological replicates. Measurement of CO2 was not possible above 5.0 vol% CO2 in the ingas, due to limited sensor range. Different successively conducted experimental runs are indicated by different symbols in the legend (*,-,+,~,#). Experimental setup is illustrated in Fig. 5a. Hydrogen transfer rate (HTR) plotted over CTR corresponding to this experiment can be found in Fig. S1. Medium: DMM-G, cGlucose = 6 g L− 1, cbuffer = 50 mM MOPS, T = 37 °C, n = 100 rpm, VL = 50 mL, initial OD600nm = 0.2, initial pH after inoculation = 6.9–7.15, vvm = 0.2 min− 1, different gas mixtures of CO2 in N2, as indicated in legend

No carbon dioxide transfer rate (CTR) is displayed for the CO2 concentrations of 10.0 and 15.0 vol%, as the limit of the CO2 sensors used in this study was reached at 5.0 vol%. The CTR curves in Fig. 1a indicate different values at the first measurement point after 1 h, depending on the CO2 concentration in the gas supply. For 0.25 vol% CO2 (black squares) in the gas supply, no substantial increase or decrease in the CTR is visible throughout the cultivation. The following concentration of 0.5 vol% CO2 (red circles) slightly increases, before decreasing to 0 mmol L− 1 h− 1. At 0.75 (green triangles) and 1.0 vol% (blue inverted triangles) CO2 in the gas supply, the CTR maximum rises with increasing CO2 concentration and is attained after 8.8 h. For 3.0 vol% CO2 (light blue diamonds), the CTR maximum is higher than the maximum of 1.0 vol%, but CO2 production also increases earlier than for the lower CO2 concentrations, and the maximum is reached earlier. With a CO2 concentration in the gas supply of 4.0 vol%, the CTR maximum attains a value of 1.6 mmol L− 1 h− 1, the highest CTR maximum of all conditions. In conclusion, the higher the CO2 concentration in the gas supply up to the highest measured concentration of 4.0 vol%, the higher the CTR maximum. Figure 1b presents the different total gas transfer rate (TGTR) progressions. Generally, the same trends represented for the CTR maxima can be seen for the TGTR maxima. The higher the CO2 concentration in the gas supply, the higher the TGTR maxima. This trend continues until a CO2 concentration of 10.0 vol% (orange triangles) is obtained. However, for 15.0 vol% CO2 (green stars), the TGTR maximum is slightly lower, but with a higher standard deviation. In general, the CTR peaks are lower than the TGTR peaks. The highest measurable CTR maximum reaches 1.6 mmol L− 1 h− 1, while the corresponding TGTR maximum attains 3.5 mmol L− 1 h− 1. CO2 only contributes between 27.2 and 45.7% to the total gas production, depending on the CO2 concentration in the gas supply.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Effect of different CO2 concentrations on offline data of P. vulgatus shake flask cultivations. These data refer to the experiment shown in Fig. 1. Offline data of (a) HPLC analysis of produced organic acids, including formate, succinate, acetate and lactate and remaining glucose from four biological replicates with standard deviation. (b) Carbon balance in % as function of the CO2 concentration in the gas supply. The start of the fermentation was set to 100%. No carbon balance is calculated for 10.0 and 15.0 vol% CO2, as CO2 could not be measured in this range. Initial samples were drawn after inoculation. (c) Final OD600nm and final pH from four biological replicates with standard deviation. Experimental setup is illustrated in Fig. 5a. Medium: DMM-G, cGlucose = 6 g L− 1, cbuffer = 50 mM MOPS, T = 37 °C, n = 100 rpm, VL = 50 mL, initial OD600nm = 0.2, initial pH after inoculation = 6.9–7.15, vvm = 0.2 min− 1, different gas mixtures of CO2 in N2, as indicated in legend

In Fig. 2, the offline data of the cultivation is shown. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) measurements were performed for the key metabolites formate, succinate, acetate, lactate, and glucose. Propionate could not be detected in these experiments. Formate (light blue hexagons), succinate (brown triangles), and acetate (purple circles) production rise with increasing CO2 concentration in the gas supply until 4.0 vol% (Fig. 2a). Lactate production (orange squares) is approximately two-fold higher with lower CO2 concentrations of up to 3.0 vol% in the gas supply and decreases with higher CO2 concentrations. The main acids produced are succinate, acetate, and lactate, with only small amounts of formate generated. The highest total amount of SCFAs is produced at 3.0 vol% CO2, whereas the lowest is formed at 0.25 vol% CO2. Glucose (pink stars) is completely consumed for conditions with 3.0 and 10.0 vol% CO2 in the gas supply. Figure 2b depicts the molar carbon balance. The molar carbon balance (calculated according to Eqs. 12) is closed with a maximum deviation of 8.5%. The biomass accounts for 25 to 46% of the total carbon, depending on the CO2 concentration in the gas supply. Moreover, low amounts of CO2 are formed, reaching a maximum of 5.9% of the total carbon. In Fig. 2c, the final pH values, as well as the final optical density (OD600nm), are displayed. The final pH values decline for increasing CO2 concentrations between 0.25 and 3.0 vol%. From there, the final pH values rise until 10.0 vol% and decrease again for 15 vol% CO2. Overall, the final pH values are low, between 4.8 and 6.7. The final OD600nm reaches the lowest value for 0.25 vol% CO2 with 1.8 and increases from there. It changes with no clear trend between 2.0 and 3.2 for the higher CO2 concentrations in the gas supply.

Influence of O2 on growth and organic acid production

To determine the O2 tolerance of P. vulgatus in shake flasks, O2 concentration in the gas supply was varied between 0 and 2.5 vol%. The CO2 concentration in the gas supply was kept constant at 4.0 vol%.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Effect of different O2 concentrations on gas transfer rates of P. vulgatus shake flask cultivations. Online data of (a) carbon dioxide transfer rate (CTR) and (b) total gas transfer rate (TGTR) and (c) oxygen transfer rate (OTR). Shadows indicate standard deviations of four biological replicates. Different successively conducted experimental runs are indicated by different symbols in the legend (*,+,-,~). Dashed horizontal line in (c) indicates an OTR of 0 mmol L− 1 h− 1. Experimental setup is illustrated in Fig. 5b. Hydrogen transfer rate (HTR) plotted over CTR corresponding to this experiment can be found in Fig. S2. Medium: DMM-G, cGlucose = 6 g L− 1, cbuffer = 50 mM MOPS, T = 37 °C, n = 100 rpm, VL = 50 mL, initial OD600nm = 0.29, initial pH after inoculation = 6.9–7.1, vvm = 0.2 min− 1, different gas mixtures of O2 & 4% CO2 in N2, as indicated in the legend

In Fig. 3, the online gas transfer rates are shown. The CTR curves in Fig. 3a start at approximately the same value after 1 h for all tested O2 concentrations. The CTR curves of the lower O2 concentrations between 0 vol% (black squares) and 0.7 vol% (purple diamonds) rise until reaching their maximum after 6 h, with no distinct trend between the four concentrations. The CTR curves of higher O2 concentrations between 1.3 (orange hexagons) and 2.5 vol% (brown pentagons) directly decline, until all curves reach 0 mmol L− 1 h− 1. The TGTR curves, depicted in Fig. 3b, display the same trends. As already observed in the previous experiments, the maxima of the TGTR curves are substantially higher than those of the CTR curves, with the TGTR attaining a maximal value of 4.3 mmol L− 1 h− 1 (0.7 vol%, purple diamonds). The corresponding CTR maxima of 0.7 vol% O2 reaches 1.9 mmol L− 1 h− 1. In Fig. 3c, the progression of the oxygen transfer rate (OTR) is presented for the O2 concentrations between 0.2 and 2.5 vol%. For 0 vol%, no calculation of the OTR was possible. The O2 concentrations of 0.2 (red circles) and 0.4 vol% (green triangles) remain at an OTR of approximately − 0.1 mmol L− 1 h− 1 throughout the cultivation. The higher O2 concentrations of 0.7 to 2.5 vol% indicate a rising OTR curve in the positive range over the first hours. 2.0 vol% (blue stars) and 2.5 vol% (brown pentagons) O2 reach an OTR maximum after 2.8 h, while 0.7 vol% (purple diamonds) and 1.3 vol% (orange hexagons) O2 conditions do not indicate a clear OTR maximum. In the following cultivation time, the OTR curves of 0.7 to 2.5 vol% O2 decrease until reaching about 0 mmol L− 1 h− 1 at the end of the cultivation. However, it must be noted that the detection limit of the OTR is reached here.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Effect of different O2 concentrations on offline data of P. vulgatus shake flask cultivations. These data refer to the experiment shown in Fig. 3. Offline data of (a) HPLC analysis of produced organic acids including propionate, formate, succinate, acetate and lactate and remaining glucose from four biological replicates with standard deviation. (b) Carbon balance in % as function of the O2 concentration in the gas supply. The start of the fermentation was set to 100%. Initial samples were drawn after inoculation. (c) Final OD600nm and final pH from four biological replicates with standard deviation. Experimental setup is illustrated in Fig. 5b. Final OD600nm and final pH each differed statistically significant for the different oxygen concentrations, for final OD600nm: p < 0.001 and for final pH: p < 0.001. Medium: DMM-G, cGlucose = 6 g L− 1, cbuffer = 50 mM MOPS, T = 37 °C, n = 100 rpm, VL = 50 mL, initial OD600nm = 0.29, initial pH after inoculation = 6.9–7.1, vvm = 0.2 min− 1, different gas mixtures of O2 & 4% CO2 in N2, as indicated in the legend, N = 4

In Fig. 4, the offline data of this set of experiments are depicted. HPLC analysis of SCFAs and glucose is outlined in Fig. 4a. Almost no propionate (dark blue reverse triangles) and formate (light blue hexagons) are formed between 0 and 0.7 vol% O2, and production stops completely with higher O2 concentrations. Succinate concentrations (brown triangles) decrease slightly between 0.2 and 0.7 vol% O2. At more elevated O2 concentrations, the concentrations decline rapidly. Acetate concentrations (purple circles) remain constant between 0 and 0.7 vol% O2 and show a substantial decrease at higher O2 concentrations. Lactate production (orange squares) is highest at 0.4 vol% O2 and strongly lowers between 1.3 and 2.5 vol% O2. Almost no acids are formed at O2 concentrations higher than 0.7 vol%. The remaining glucose (pink stars) decreases between 0 and 0.7 vol% O2. Only low amounts of glucose have been consumed for O2 concentrations between 1.3 and 2.5 vol%. The molar carbon balance presented in Fig. 4b is closed with a maximal deviation of 6.5%. Cell dry weight (CDW) accounts on average for 32.8% of the total carbon for O2 concentrations between 0 and 0.7 vol% and 6.6% at O2 concentrations between 1.3 and 2.5 vol%. As in the set of experiments before, CO2 contribution to the total carbon is low, with a maximum of 6.4%. Figure 4c illustrates the final pH values and the final OD600nm. A Mann-Whitney-U-Test was conducted to assess the influence of different oxygen concentrations on the final OD600nm and final pH values. Final OD600nm and final pH values were split in two groups for the statistical analysis, low (0-0.7 vol%) and high oxygen concentration levels (1.3–2.5 vol%). The distributions between both groups differed, according to Kolmogorov-Smirnov p < 0.001. The final OD600nm and final pH values differed statistically significant for the two oxygen concentration levels. The final pH values reveal a significant increase between 0.7 and 1.3 vol% O2, while the data of the final OD600nm displays a substantial decrease between those O2 concentrations. To exclude the pH value as a responsible parameter for the observed results, the influence of different O2 concentrations was validated in another set of experiments with higher initial pH values (Fig. S3).

Discussion

Influence of CO2 on growth and organic acid production

With increasing CO2 concentration in the gas supply up to a concentration of 10.0 vol% (Fig. 1), CO2 production rises. However, interpretation of CO2 production via CTR must be conducted cautiously, as pH changes can also contribute to CTRs. While pH values decrease, CO2 is released due to the chemical CO2/HCO3 balance [29]. During cultivation, the pH values decrease caused by the strain’s organic acid production. With increasing CO2 concentrations, especially observable from 3.0 vol%, the maximum of the CTR and TGTR curves is reached faster. This behavior can be observed until a CO2 concentration of 10.0 vol% is obtained. Lower CO2 concentrations, especially 0.25-1.0 vol%, prolong the lag phase of gas formation. Caspari and Macy [30] observed a prolonged lag phase for genetically related Bacteroides fragilis for CO2/HCO3 concentrations below 10 mM (corresponding to about 12 vol% CO2 in the gas supply). They further observed that the maximum growth rate and cell yield decreased. Interestingly, the limiting CO2 concentrations observed for B. fragilis are substantially higher than those observed for P. vulgatus in this study. Furthermore, Franke and Deppenmeier [21] observed that P. vulgatus is less dependent on CO2 and HCO3 as the genetically related Prevotella copri. While P. copri only reached maximal biomass formation above 20 mM HCO3, P. vulgatus reached maximal growth yields at lower HCO3 concentrations of ~ 10 mM. Reilly [25] studied the CO2 optimum for P. vulgatus cultivating on agar plates and found the optimum between 0.25 and 40 vol% CO2 in the gas supply. Above 40 vol% CO2, growth was inhibited. This study already observed reduced gas production at 15 vol% CO2.

The TGTR is higher than the CTR, confirming the formation of another gas besides CO2. Gas chromatography (data not shown) has proven that the only other gas besides CO2 is H2, which has also been revealed in other studies for P. vulgatus [31,32,33]. In Fig. S1, the hydrogen transfer rate (HTR) for 0.75 to 4.0 vol% CO2, calculated from TGTR and CTR, is plotted over the CTR. The decreasing slope with increasing CO2 concentration points out that while the CO2 concentration in the gas supply decreases, more H2 is formed, in relation to CO2. Since the metabolic pathways of P. vulgatus are not yet fully understood, it is unclear, what causes this shift from CO2 to H2 production.

Since at a concentration of 0.25 vol% CO2, the OD600nm is lower than for the higher CO2 concentrations, some amount of CO2 seems to be utilized for biomass production. Caspari and Macy [30] could as well observe for B. fragilis a decreasing final OD600nm for concentrations of ~ 12 vol% CO2 or lower in the gas supply. The pH (Fig. 2) decreases strongly at all CO2 concentrations higher than 0.25 vol%. Final values are in an inhibitory range for P. vulgatus. The literature demonstrates that pH values below 6.0 have a growth inhibitory effect on P. vulgatus, and growth stops entirely at a pH value below 5.3 [4, 34]. The second lowest final pH is reached at 3.0 vol% CO2, affiliating with the highest organic acid production. The lowest final pH is reached at 15.0 vol% CO2, probably caused by the high CO2 concentration, as it does not correlate with the highest organic acid production. The low final pH is a factor for growth inhibition, and another factor may be product inhibition by the organic acids formed by P. vulgatus.

At increasing CO2 concentrations, succinate, acetate, and formate production are rising (Fig. 2). Lactate formation increases with decreasing CO2 concentration. The high lactate formation at low CO2 concentrations may be an easy way for P. vulgatus to balance the production of redox equivalents [22]. Lactate production requires only the enzyme lactate dehydrogenase and is the most straightforward metabolic pathway [10]. Enhanced lactate production at lower CO2 concentrations and an increased acetate concentration at elevated CO2 concentrations were also observed in the study of Caspari and Macy [30] for B. fragilis. Succinate formation rises with increasing CO2 concentration in the gas supply, since the organism must first accumulate CO2 to start succinate formation [3]. Under CO2 deficiency, succinate could be converted to propionate, to release bound CO2 and utilize the CO2. However, in this study, no propionate could be detected with HPLC measurements, even at low CO2 concentrations, e.g., 0.25 vol%. At low CO2 concentrations, little succinate was produced, so almost no succinate was available for conversion to propionate. Acetate and formate do not increase as much as succinate with elevated CO2 concentration. Metabolic limitation is evident for all cultivations with CO2 concentrations below 3.0 or above 10.0 vol%, because glucose is not completely metabolized.

Although succinate production increased with increasing CO2 concentration, with 15.0 vol% CO2 in the gas supply, P. vulgatus achieved only 0.36 mol succinate/mol glucose. Therefore, P. vulgatus is less efficient than other succinate producers, such as A. succinogenes with 1.42 mol succinate/mol glucose [35] or A. succiniciproducens with 1.33 mol succinate/mol glucose [36]. P. vulgatus forms high amounts of acetate and lactate besides succinate and low amounts of formate, resulting in a yield for total SCFA of 1.1 mol acid/mol glucose. The total SCFA yield is close to the succinate yield of the beforementioned producers. The carbon balance is closed for these experiments, demonstrating that all major products contributing carbon to the balance have been considered. In this study, the optimal CO2 production for acid production by P. vulgatus was 3.0 vol%. Biomass growth was highest in the range of 0.5 to 4.0 vol%.

Influence of O2 on growth and organic acid production

P. vulgatus reveals an unimpaired growth in the range of 0-0.7 vol% O2 in the gas supply (Fig. 3). Within this range, there is little deviation between all measured values, online and offline. An abrupt decline in viability is visible in the data, while increasing the O2 concentration from 0.7 to 1.3 vol%. This decline is evident for all measured values (Figs. 3 and 4). The exhibited O2 tolerance is higher than the published data of Bacteroides species, which specifies the O2 tolerance between 0.03 and 0.4 vol%. Only for Bacteroides melaninogenicus a higher O2 tolerance of up to 2.5 vol% was evaluated [15, 20]. It should be noted that the addition of L-cysteine as a reducing agent to the medium can reduce the oxidative damage on P. vulgatus. The relatively high O2 tolerance of P. vulgatus helps the species to maintain its high proportion in the gut, as O2 can be encountered in low concentrations of < 1 vol% [15, 37, 38]. However, the decline in viability, acid, and gas production above 0.7 vol% O2 is due to the damage that O2 causes to anaerobic bacteria. Molecular O2 diffuses into the cell and inactivates enzymes with a radical in its active center [15]. Another mechanism may be the formation of ROS, which can react with many molecules in the cell and lead to DNA, lipid, and disulfide bond damage [16].

As observed in the experiments with changing CO2 concentrations, the TGTR is substantially higher than the CTR. Comparing HTR with CTR (Fig. S2) discloses that the O2 concentration has only a neglectable influence on the CO2/H2 ratio, compared to the influence of the CO2 concentration in the gas supply.

Interestingly, despite the anaerobic character of P. vulgatus, a positive OTR (oxygen consumption) could be measured (Fig. 3). However, the OTR values are lower than those of aerobic microorganisms [27]. The OTR favor the assumption that O2 was reacting with medium components (e.g. L-cysteine) or was utilized in small amounts by P. vulgatus during the first hours of the cultivation. The enzyme cytochrome bd oxidase is a possible consumer of O2 [20], which enables the use of molecular O2 as a final electron acceptor instead of fumarate. In addition, cytochrome bd oxidase could act as a buffer enzyme to ensure electron flow through the anaerobic respiratory chain, despite O2 being present and prevent O2 from damaging other components in the cell. The study of Baughn and Malamy [20] finds evidence for unrestricted growth of P. vulgatus up to 0.03 vol% O2. The decrease in viability, when the O2 concentration reaches values above 0.7 vol%, is caused by the O2 damage exceeding the capacity of P. vulgatus protective mechanisms. In order to examine the oxidative stress response of P. vulgatus, L-cysteine should not be added to the medium. In this study, growth and organic acid production of P. vulgatus in a best-case scenario was investigated. Therefore, L-cysteine was added to the medium.

Considering the acid production (Fig. 4), succinate and propionate production decrease strongly with O2 concentrations of 0.7 vol% or higher. One possible explanation for this decrease is the O2-induced downregulation of the potentially ROS-forming enzyme fumarate reductase, which is necessary to produce succinate and propionate. For future experiments, expression studies for fumarate reductase are planned. The same behavior is observed for acetate production, as the enzymes crucial for acetate production are damaged by O2 [15]. The damaged acetate pathway leads to a lack of redox equivalents in the form of Fdred. The lack of redox equivalents could be the reason why lactate production is increased for 0.4 and 0.7 vol% O2. Lactate formation is an easy way for P. vulgatus to balance the production of redox equivalents [22].

The final pH is low, with a value of avg. 4.8 for the O2 range 0-0.7 vol% (Fig. 4c). The pH value influences P. vulgatus growth behavior. Therefore, the pH value as a responsible parameter for the observed results was excluded (Fig. S3). The slight increase in glucose consumption and final OD600nm from 0 to 0.7 vol% O2 (Fig. 4a and c) lead to the conclusion that more glucose is used to produce biomass. Due to the impact of O2, the enzymes to produce SCFAs might be damaged or downregulated. Nevertheless, through the low amounts of produced SCFAs and the low growth, some metabolic activity is indicated even at O2 concentrations above 0.7 vol%. The activity probably occurred during the first hours of cultivation, when the protective mechanisms of P. vulgatus had not yet reached their capacity.

Conclusions

Concluding this study, the optimum of tested CO2 concentrations for total organic acid and for succinate production by P. vulgatus is 3.0 vol% and 15.0 vol%, respectively. The O2 tolerance lies above 0.7, but below 1.3 vol%. P. vulgatus is inhibited by pH, the produced SCFAs, or a combination of both. The species could achieve higher titers of succinate in a pH-controlled fermentation, as demonstrated by Isar et al. [39] and Isar et al. [40] for B. fragilis. Other important next steps are genetic modifications, which have been proven to increase lactate production for P. vulgatus by Lück and Deppenmeier [10]. However, acid production must be shifted from acetate and lactate to succinate, the most valuable product. To evaluate the exact O2 tolerance of P. vulgatus, a continuous fermentation with a gradually raised O2 concentration over time would pose the best solution. Additionally, it would be important to have a medium without reducing agents, e.g. L-cysteine.

Determining the CO2 requirement and O2 tolerance for growth and organic acid production of P. vulgatus exhibits the potential for an industrial application. However, the species cannot yet compete with established industrial SCFA producers. The species requires little CO2 and has a certain O2 tolerance. These results may contribute to a faster optimization of P. vulgatus as an organic acid producer and display that strictly anaerobic bacteria can tolerate more O2 than expected.

Methods

Strain and media

The research group of Prof. Deppenmeier (Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Bonn, Germany) kindly provided the strain Phocaeicola vulgatus DSM 1447, obtained from the German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures (DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany). Brain heart infusion medium (BHI) for cryogenic stocks was acquired as BD Difco™ (Thermo Fisher, Waltham, USA). BHI powder contained: 7.7 g L− 1 calf brain extract, 9.8 g L− 1 beef heart extract, 10 g L− 1 protease peptone, 2 g L− 1 dextrose, 5 g L− 1 sodium chloride, and 2.5 g L− 1 disodium phosphate, dissolved in deionized water. An active growing BHI culture was used to prepare cryogenic stocks after 24 h of cultivation by mixing 50 vol% culture broth with 50 vol% anaerobic sucrose solution (500 g L− 1) and freezing 1.8 mL aliquots at -80 °C. For all main and precultures, a defined minimal medium with glucose (DMM-G) was used. DMM-G composition was based on Varel and Bryant [41] and Lück and Deppenmeier [10] with 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulfonic acid (MOPS) buffer instead of bicarbonate buffer. If not stated otherwise, DMM-G medium components were obtained from Carl Roth (Karlsruhe, Germany). The medium consisted of 13 individual stock solutions: Base components (pH 7.4), glucose, calcium chloride, magnesium chloride, iron(II) sulfate, SL6-trace elements, Wolin’s vitamin solution, butyrate, vitamin K1, hemin, resazurin (Thermo Fisher, Waltham, USA), L-cysteine hydrochloride, and MOPS buffer (pH 7.4). Stock solutions were stored separately, as premature mixing would have caused precipitation. The base components stock comprised ammonium chloride, dipotassium phosphate, monopotassium phosphate, and sodium chloride. The SL6-trace elements included boric acid, cobalt(II)chloride hexahydrate, copper(II)chloride dihydrate, manganese(II)chloride tetrahydrate (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany), nickel(II)chloride, sodium molybdate dihydrate and zinc sulfate heptahydrate (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and were set to pH 7.4 with 5 M sodium hydroxide. The Wolin’s vitamin stock solution contained α-lipoic acid, biotin, folate (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, USA), nicotinamide, p-aminobenzoic acid (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, USA), pantothenic acid (AppliChem, Darmstadt, Germany), pyridoxine hydrochloride (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, USA), riboflavin (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, USA), thiamine hydrochloride and vitamin B12. Table S1 lists the final concentrations of all components in the DMM-G medium. Base components, glucose, calcium chloride, magnesium chloride, iron(II) sulfate, and SL6-trace elements stocks were sterilized at 121 °C for 20 min. The remaining heat-sensitive stock solutions were sterile-filtered with 0.22 μm polyethersulfone filters (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). To prevent premature oxidation, reducing agent L-cysteine was sterile-filtered and stored anaerobically in a serum bottle with a nitrogen atmosphere. Wolin’s vitamin solution, vitamin K1, hemin, and resazurin stock solutions were stored light-protected at 4 °C after sterilization. All other stock solutions were stored at room temperature.

Cultivation conditions

Precultures were grown in serum bottles with a total volume of 250 mL. The serum bottles were filled with 50 mL DMM-G medium and sealed gas-tight with a rubber stopper and clamp. Afterward, the serum bottles were gassed with N2 for 20 min to ensure an anaerobic atmosphere. In the next step, CO2 was added to the serum bottles with a sterile syringe to obtain a CO2 headspace concentration of 10 vol%. Afterward, 0.1 mL L-cysteine solution was added as a reducing agent, and in the final step, the medium was inoculated with 500 μL cryogenic culture, both with a sterile syringe. The serum bottles were inoculated in a temperature-controlled shaker for 24 h at 37 °C with a shaking diameter of 50 mm and a shaking frequency of 100 rpm. The main experiments were performed in a RAMOS device designed by Anderlei and Büchs [27]. The RAMOS is a non-invasive online monitoring device for measuring CO2, O2, and pressure for up to eight shake flasks. Anderlei and Büchs [27], Anderlei et al. [28], and Munch et al. [26] provide a schematic overview of the RAMOS setup and gas measurement phases as well as the calculation of the carbon dioxide transfer rate (CTR), oxygen transfer rate (OTR) and total gas transfer rate (TGTR). Measurement of the increase of produced gases is conducted with pressure sensors (26PCA, Honeywell, Charlotte, USA) and infrared carbon dioxide sensors (MSH-P − CO2, 126 Dynament, Mansfield, UK). The RAMOS device is a proven system and has already been operated with syngas [42] or ethylene [43] in the ingas. As the gas measurement phases needed to be adapted to the specific microorganism, time and gas flows were set for both CO2 and O2 experiments as follows: 20 min measurement phase without gas flow, 2.38 min high gas flow rate at 22.5 mL min− 1, and 40 min low gas flow rate at 10 mL min− 1. Before inserting the shake flasks in the RAMOS device, they were filled with 45 mL sterile DMM-G medium and gassed overnight with the respective cultivation gas at 37 °C in a shaker (ISF1-X, Adolf Kühner AG, Birsfelden, Switzerland) at 100 rpm, with a shaking diameter of 50 mm. The system was tested for gas tightness to ensure anaerobic conditions and to prevent false gas measurements. As a reducing agent, 0.1 mL L-cysteine was inserted with a sterile syringe into each flask before inoculation with 5 mL preculture. Initial samples were drawn after inoculation, and final samples at the end of the cultivation.

Gas mixing system

The gas mixing system consists of up to four mass flow controllers (MFCs) and one control unit, which can be connected to the RAMOS. Therefore, the signal from the RAMOS controls the gas mixing system, to switch between the aforementioned different gas measurement phases.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Schematic illustration of the experimental setup of the gas mixing system. Change of the (a) CO2 or (b) O2 concentration in the gas supply. In case of (b), the dilution of N2 and CO2 by O2 remains very low. Four mass flow controllers (MFC) were used with following ranges, for (a): MFC 1 & 3: 50–500 mL/min (calibrated with N2), MFC 2: 5–50 mL/min (calibrated with O2), MFC 4: 0.5-5 mL/min (calibrated with N2) and for (b): MFC 1: 5–50 mL/min (calibrated with O2), MFC 2 & 3: 50–500 mL/min (calibrated with N2) and MFC 4: 2–20 mL/min (calibrated with N2). This setup was chosen, as experiments at two different gas compositions can be performed with four shake flasks each

The schematic setup of the gas mixing system with gas supply lines can be found in Fig. 5a for different CO2 concentrations and Fig. 5b for different O2 concentrations. The setup was designed so that four shake flasks within the RAMOS can be operated with one gas concentration and the other four with a second gas concentration. After adjusting the gas supply lines, the gas flows were set prior to the experiments. Desired gas concentrations were configured as a percentage of the total maximum flow of the MFC on the control unit. Afterward, the settings of the MFCs were tested by measuring the total flow from the gas mixing system with a gas flow calibrator, Defender 530 + L (Mesa Laboratories, Inc., Lakewood, USA). Before the experiment, a calibration curve was created for the CO2 and O2 sensors within the RAMOS device. With the help of the calibration curve, the concentrations set by the gas mixing system of CO2 and O2 were checked and, if necessary, adjusted.

Hydrogen transfer rate

Besides CO2, also H2 is produced. As no other gases are formed, the hydrogen transfer rate (HTR) was calculated by subtracting the CTR from the TGTR.

Offline analysis

Initial and final samples were collected and directly used for OD600nm measurement at a wavelength of 600 nm with a Genesys 20 spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Germany). Samples were diluted with 9 g L− 1 NaCl. To correlate the optical density and CDW, the equation \(CDW = 0.563 \cdot O{D_{600nm}}\), derived in [44, in revision] for P. vulgatus, was used. Samples not used for optical density measurement were centrifuged at 18,000 rpm for 5 min. The supernatant was used for HPLC and pH measurement. The pH was measured with a pH electrode (Mettler-Toledo, Columbus, USA). The remaining sample supernatant was stored at -80 °C for further HPLC analysis. Therefore, samples were thawed and filtered with 0.2 μm cellulose acetate filters (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). The SCFAs, acetate, succinate, lactate, propionate, formate, and remaining glucose were measured by HPLC. The HPLC device (Dionex, Sunnyvale, USA) was equipped with an organic acid resin column of 300 × 8 mm dimensions (CS-Chromatography, Langerwehe, Germany) and set to 60 °C. As an eluent, 5 mM H2SO4 at a flow rate of 0.8 mL min−1 was applied. UV/VIS and a refractive index detector were used during HPLC measurement.

Carbon balances

Carbon balances were calculated for all experiments with the following Eq. 1:

$$Carbo{n_{inX}}\left[ {\frac{{mmol}}{L}} \right] = \frac{{Carbon\,molecule{s_{inX}}\left[ - \right]}}{{{M_X}\left[ {\frac{g}{{mmol}}} \right]}} \cdot {c_X}\left[ {\frac{g}{L}} \right]$$
(1)

Where X is the specific compound, c is the concentration [g L− 1], MX is the molar mass of the specific compound [g mol− 1], Carbon moleculesin X is the number of carbon atoms in the specific compound [-], and Carbonin X is the molar carbon concentration for the compound [mmol L− 1].

The compounds glucose, acetate, lactate, succinate, propionate, formate, CO2, and biomass of every sample were considered. Initial and final concentrations of glucose, acetate, lactate, succinate, propionate, and formate were measured by HPLC. The microbial biomass of P. vulgatus cells was based on data from Franke and Deppenmeier [21] of P. copri microbial biomass. Molar carbon from CO2 was calculated from the CTR integral based on equations in Munch et al. [26]. First, the volumetric molar carbon [mmol L− 1] for each compound was calculated, and then the values were combined to obtain the total volumetric molar carbon content for every sample. Finally, to achieve relative values for the carbon content of the compounds, the molar carbon value was divided by the total carbon of the sample, as shown in Eq. 2:

$$Carbo{n_{Samplen}}\left[ \% \right] = \frac{{Carbo{n_{in\,X,Sample\,n}}\left[ {\frac{{mmol}}{L}} \right]}}{{Total\,Carbo{n_{Sample\,n}}\left[ {\frac{{mmol}}{L}} \right]}}$$
(2)

Where Sample n is designated to a specific sample number in a specific experiment, Carbonin X, Sample n is the volumetric molar carbon of the specific compound in Sample n [mmol L− 1], and Total CarbonSample n is the sum of all carbon in this Sample n [mmol L− 1].

Software

All graphs were created with OriginPro® version 2021 from OriginLab Corporation (Massachusetts, USA).

Statistical analyses

Statistical Analyses were performed in order to assess the influence of different oxygen concentrations on different cultivation parameters by Mann-Whitney-U-Test using OriginPro® version 2021 from OriginLab Corporation (Massachusetts, USA). Final OD600nm and final pH values were split in two groups for the statistical analysis, low (0-0.7 vol%) and high oxygen concentration levels (1.3–2.5 vol%). To determine if the distributions between both groups differed, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov-Test was conducted.

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Change history

  • 16 December 2023

    The author’s comment in the proofed version concerning the positioning of the figures should be implemented.

References

  1. Mahowald MA, Rey FE, Seedorf H, Turnbaugh PJ, Fulton RS, Wollam A, et al. Characterizing a model human gut microbiota composed of members of its two dominant bacterial phyla. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106(14):5859–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wexler HM. Bacteroides: the good, the bad, and the nitty-gritty. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007;20(4):593–621.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Fischbach MA, Sonnenburg J. Eating for two: how metabolism establishes interspecies interactions in the gut. Cell Host Microbe. 2011;10(4):336–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Flint HJ, Scott KP, Louis P, Duncan SH. The role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. Nat Rev Gastro Hepat. 2012;9(10):577–89.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Flint HJ, Duncan SH, Scott KP, Louis P. Interactions and competition within the microbial community of the human colon: links between diet and health. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9(5):1101–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Salyers AA. Bacteroides of the human lower intestinal tract. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1984;38:293–313.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Macfarlane S, Macfarlane GT. Regulation of short-chain fatty acid production. P Nutr Soc. 2003;62(1):67–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ríos-Covián D, Ruas-Madiedo P, Margolles A, Gueimonde M, Los Reyes-Gavilán CG, Salazar N. Intestinal short chain fatty acids and their link with diet and human health. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:185.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Mayhew JW, Onderdonk AB, Gorbach SL. Effects of time and growth media on short-chain fatty acid production by Bacteroides fragilis. Appl Microbiol. 1975;29(4):472–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Lück R, Deppenmeier U. Genetic tools for the redirection of the central carbon flow towards the production of lactate in the human gut bacterium Phocaeicola (Bacteroides) vulgatus. Appl Microbiol Biot. 2022;106(3):1211–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Neff A, Lück R, Hövels M, Deppenmeier U. Expanding the repertoire of counterselection markers for markerless gene deletion in the human gut bacterium Phocaeicola vulgatus. Anaerobe. 2023;81:102742.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. García-López M, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Tindall BJ, Gronow S, Woyke T, Kyrpides NC et al. Analysis of 1,000 type-strain genomes improves taxonomic classification of Bacteroidetes. Front Microbiol 2019; 10:2083.

  13. Savage DC. Microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1977;31:107–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hylemon PB, Harris SC, Ridlon JM. Metabolism of hydrogen gases and bile acids in the gut microbiome. FEBS Lett. 2018;592(12):2070–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lu Z, Imlay JA. When anaerobes encounter oxygen: mechanisms of oxygen toxicity, tolerance and defence. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2021;19(12):774–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Mishra S, Imlay JA. An anaerobic bacterium, Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, uses a consortium of enzymes to scavenge hydrogen peroxide. Mol Microbiol. 2013;90(6):1356–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Smalley D, Rocha ER, Smith CJ. Aerobic-type ribonucleotide reductase in the anaerobe Bacteroides fragilis. J Bacteriol. 2002;184(4):895–903.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Sund CJ, Rocha ER, Tzianabos AO, Tzinabos AO, Wells WG, Gee JM, et al. The Bacteroides fragilis transcriptome response to oxygen and H2O2: the role of OxyR and its effect on survival and virulence. Mol Microbiol. 2008;67(1):129–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Meehan BM, Malamy MH. Fumarate reductase is a major contributor to the generation of reactive oxygen species in the anaerobe Bacteroides fragilis. Microbiol (Reading). 2012;158(Pt 2):539–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Baughn AD, Malamy MH. The strict anaerobe Bacteroides fragilis grows in and benefits from nanomolar concentrations of oxygen. Nature. 2004;427(6973):441–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Franke T, Deppenmeier U. Physiology and central carbon metabolism of the gut bacterium Prevotella copri. Mol Microbiol. 2018;109(4):528–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Hoek MJA, Merks RMH. Redox balance is key to explaining full vs. partial switching to low-yield metabolism. BMC Syst Biol. 2012;6:22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Morrison DJ, Preston T. Formation of short chain fatty acids by the gut microbiota and their impact on human metabolism. Gut Microbes. 2016;7(3):189–200.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Koh A, Vadder F, Kovatcheva-Datchary P, Bäckhed F. From dietary fiber to host physiology: short-chain fatty acids as key bacterial metabolites. Cell. 2016;165(6):1332–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reilly S. The carbon dioxide requirements of anaerobic bacteria. J Med Microbiol. 1980;13(4):573–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Munch G, Schulte A, Mann M, Dinger R, Regestein L, Rehmann L, et al. Online measurement of CO2 and total gas production in parallel anaerobic shake flask cultivations. Biochem Eng J. 2020;153:107418.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Anderlei T, Büchs J. Device for sterile online measurement of the oxygen transfer rate in shaking flasks. Biochem Eng J. 2001;7(2):157–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Anderlei T, Zang W, Papaspyrou M, Büchs J. Online respiration activity measurement (OTR, CTR, RQ) in shake flasks. Biochem Eng J. 2004;17(3):187–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Tresguerres M, Buck J, Levin LR. Physiological carbon dioxide, bicarbonate, and pH sensing. Pflug Arch Eur J Phy. 2010;460(6):953–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Caspari D, Macy JM. The role of carbon dioxide in glucose metabolism of Bacteroides fragilis. Arch Microbiol. 1983;135(1):16–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Traore SI, Khelaifia S, Armstrong N, Lagier JC, Raoult D. Isolation and culture of Methanobrevibacter smithii by co-culture with hydrogen-producing bacteria on agar plates. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25(12):1561. e1-1561.e5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kazimierowicz J, Dębowski M, Zieliński M. Effectiveness of hydrogen production by Bacteroides vulgatus in psychrophilic fermentation of cattle slurry. Clean Technol. 2022;4(3):806–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. McKay LF, Holbrook WP, Eastwood MA. Methane and hydrogen production by human intestinal anaerobic bacteria. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand B. 1982;90(3):257–60.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Duncan SH, Louis P, Thomson JM, Flint HJ. The role of pH in determining the species composition of the human colonic microbiota. Environ Microbiol. 2009;11(8):2112–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dessie W, Xin F, Zhang W, Jiang Y, Wu H, Ma J, et al. Opportunities, challenges, and future perspectives of succinic acid production by Actinobacillus succinogenes. Appl Microbiol Biot. 2018;102(23):9893–910.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Bechthold I, Bretz K, Kabasci S, Kopitzky R, Springer A. Succinic acid: a new platform chemical for biobased polymers from renewable resources. Chem Eng Technol. 2008;31(5):647–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Kim R, Attayek PJ, Wang Y, Furtado KL, Tamayo R, Sims CE, et al. An in vitro intestinal platform with a self-sustaining oxygen gradient to study the human gut/microbiome interface. Biofabrication. 2019;12(1):15006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Singhal R, Shah YM. Oxygen battle in the gut: Hypoxia and hypoxia-inducible factors in metabolic and inflammatory responses in the intestine. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(30):10493–505.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Isar J, Agarwal L, Saran S, Saxena RK. Succinic acid production from Bacteroides fragilis: process optimization and scale up in a bioreactor. Anaerobe. 2006;12(5–6):231–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Isar J, Agarwal L, Saran S, Kaushik R, Saxena RK. A statistical approach to study the interactive effects of process parameters on succinic acid production from Bacteroides fragilis. Anaerobe. 2007;13(2):50–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Varel VH, Bryant MP. Nutritional features of Bacteroides fragilis subsp. fragilis. Appl Microbiol. 1974;28(2):251–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Mann M, Hüser A, Schick B, Dinger R, Miebach K, Büchs J. Online monitoring of gas transfer rates during CO and CO/H2 gas fermentation in quasi-continuously ventilated shake flasks. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2021;118(5):2092–104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schulte A, Schilling JV, Nolten J, Korona A, Krömke H, Vennekötter J-B, et al. Parallel online determination of ethylene release rate by shaken parsley cell cultures using a modified RAMOS device. BMC Plant Biol. 2018;18(1):101.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Keitel L, Miebach K, Rummel L, Yordanov S, Büchs J. Process analysis of the anaerobe Phocaeicola vulgatus in shake flask and fermenter reveals pH and product inhibition. Submitted in April; 2023.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Prof. Dr. Uwe Deppenmeier and Rebecca Lück (Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Bonn, Germany) for providing the microbial strain used in this work. Furthermore, we thank Maren Großeheide (Chair of Chemical Process Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany) for gas chromatograph measurements. Finally, we are grateful to René Petri (Chair of Biochemical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany) for his invaluable technical support in HPLC analysis.

Funding

This study was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, Grant number: 031B0846B). Projekt DEAL, supervised by the German Rectors’ Conference, supported publication under creative commons license CC-BY.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

L.K. and J.B. conceived and designed the research. U.K. and M.F. designed, and U.K. created the gas mixing system. L.K., K.B., M.F., and S.Y. conducted experiments and analysed data. L.K. wrote the manuscript. L.K. and J.B. revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jochen Büchs.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1: Fig. S1

HTR plotted over CTR with linear fit for P. vulgatus cultivations with changing CO2 in the gas supply

Supplementary Material 2: Fig. S2

HTR plotted over CTR with linear fit for P. vulgatus cultivations with changing O2 in the gas supply

Supplementary Material 3: Fig. S3

Effect of changing initial pH value and changing oxygen concentrations in the gas supply

Supplementary Material 4: Table S1

: Concentration of DMM-G medium components used in this work in alphabetical order

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Keitel, L., Braun, K., Finger, M. et al. Carbon dioxide and trace oxygen concentrations impact growth and product formation of the gut bacterium Phocaeicola vulgatus. BMC Microbiol 23, 391 (2023). https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1186/s12866-023-03127-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.1186/s12866-023-03127-x

Keywords