Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Technical Data

Type of microorganism	Yeast
Microorganism name	Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Temperature range	30°C (Marius et al., 2017) 35°C (Bertasini et al., 2022)
pH range	pH 5.5 (Mondal et al., 2012) pH 6 (Hezarjaribi et al., 2016)
Carbon and nitrogen source	Glucose, (NH4)2SO4 (Mondal et al., 2012) Glucose, glycine, (NH4)2SO4 (Hezarjaribi et al., 2016)
Growth rate (µ)	0,21/hour (Malairuang et al., 2020)
Companies (product)	Marmite Cenovis Bragg Vegemite
Wild-type or GMO	Wild-type
Feedstock case studies (suitable substrates)	Candy production effluent, date palm waste, sugar beet pulp, fruits and vegetebles waste (Bajic et al., 2022) Sweet orange residue, deproteinized leaf juice, banana skin, mango waste, sweet orange peel, rind of pomegranate, apple waste, waste capsicum powder,papaya extract, agro-industrty waste, cucumber peel, orange peel,pineapple waste, cashew apple, jackfruit, cacao, prickly custard apple, mangosteen (Rajput et al., 2024)
% SCP (w/w percentage of protein in dried biomass)	9.64-79.14% depending on substrate (Rajput et al., 2024)
cell biomass dry weight (CDW) = biomass yield? (g/L or g/g?) (weight of biomass/total weight or volume)	1.528% (w/v) (on lab scale in flask on mango waste) (Marius et al., 2017) * 0.195% (w/v) (on lab scale in bioreactor with candy production effluent as C source) (Bertasini et al., 2022)
Protein content in final product	36% (w/w) in Marmite, 25.9% (w/w) in Vegemite, 35% (w/w) in Cenovis 47% (w/w) in Bragg's nutritional yeast seasoning.
Protein titer (g/L or g/g?) grams of protein / total weight or volume	1.21% (w/v) (own calculation based on Marius et al., (2017)). Done on lab scale in flask on mango waste. * 0.036% (w/v) (own calculation based on Bertasini et al., (2022)). Done on lab scale in bioreactor with candy production effluent as C source.
Productivity (g/Lh)	0.0104 on lab scale in bioreactor with candy production effluent as C source (Bertasini et al., 2022)
Protein yield on C-source (% w/w)	17.72% (w/w) on lab scale in bioreactor with candy production effluent as C source (Bertasini et al., 2022)
Scale	From lab scale to industrial scale (Bragg, Marmite, Vegemite). Info on parameters only found for lab scale research, not on industrial scale.
Downstream purification processing complexity	Centrigugation step to isolate. Heat treatment is required to reduce RNA content. Overall minimal downstream processing. (Vukušić & Barbe, 2021)
Nucleic acid content	4.0-10.2% (Anderson et al., 2024)
Techno-functional and/or nutritional properties (e.g. meat-like texture, amino acid profile, digestibility)	High protein content (all amino acids present), high amount of unsaturated fats (Razzaq et al., 2020)
Target application (Food, feed, other)	Used in both food and feed sector
Advantages	All essential amino acids, high in unsatured fats. Long history of use. Authorized all over the world. Used as flavour enhancer (seasoning)
Challenges (Key limitations, risk factors)	Amount of amino acids limiting for children of 2-3 years old. (Razzaq et al., 2020). No meat-like texture
Regulatory status in Europe	Not considered as a novel food. It is allowed and on the market in Europe as food and feed.
Regulatory status in other parts of the world	Allowed all over the world
Extra/remark
Publications/references	Rajput, S. D., Pandey, N., & Sahu, K. (2024). A comprehensive report on valorization of waste to single cell protein: strategies, challenges, and future prospects. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 31(18), 26378–26414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-33004-7 Bajić, B., Vučurović, D., Vasić, Đ., Jevtić-Mučibabić, R., & Dodić, S. (2022). Biotechnological Production of Sustainable Microbial Proteins from Agro-Industrial Residues and By-Products. Foods, 12(1), 107. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12010107 Marius, K. S., Cheik, A. T. O., Iliassou, M., Mahamadi, N., Ibrahim, K., Nicolas, O., Desire, T., & Alfred, S. (2017). Optimization of Saccharomyces cerevisiae SKM10 single cell protein production from mango (Magnifera indica L.) waste using response surface methodology. AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY, 16(45), 2127–2133. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajb2017.16210 Mondal, A. K., Sengupta, S., Bhowal, J., & Bhattacharya, D. K. (2012). Utilization of fruit wastes in producing single cell protein. International Journal of Science Environment, 1(5), 430–438. Hezarjaribi, M., Ardestani, F., & Ghorbani, H. R. (2016). Single Cell Protein Production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae Using an Optimized Culture Medium Composition in a Batch Submerged Bioprocess. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 179(8), 1336–1345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-016-2069-9 Malairuang, K., Krajang, M., Sukna, J., Rattanapradit, K., & Chamsart, S. (2020). High Cell Density Cultivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae with Intensive Multiple Sequential Batches Together with a Novel Technique of Fed-Batch at Cell Level (FBC). Processes, 8(10), 1321. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8101321 Anderson, A., Van Der Mijnsbrugge, A., Cameleyre, X., & Gorret, N. (2024). From yeast screening for suitability as single cell protein to fed-batch cultures. Biotechnology Letters. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-024-03504-0 Razzaq, Z. U., Khan, M. K. I., Maan, A. A., & Rahman, S. U. (2020). Characterization of single cell protein from Saccharomyces cerevisiae for nutritional, functional and antioxidant properties. Journal of Food Measurement & Characterization, 14(5), 2520–2528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-020-00498-x Vukušić, J. L., & Barbe, S. (2021). Sustainable concepts in industrial baker´s yeast production. Technische Hochschule Köln. Bertasini, D., Binati, R. L., Bolzonella, D., & Battista, F. (2022). Single Cell Proteins production from food processing effluents and digestate. Chemosphere, 296, 134076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134076