2013
DOI: 10.1007/s10811-013-0202-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of ultrasound on the growth and viability of microalgae cells

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The method employed for cell disruption determines the quality and yields of the intracellular metabolites. The efficiencies of the cell wall disruption methods depend on cell wall strength (Joyce et al 2014). The composition and structure of the microalgal cell wall varies among strains.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The method employed for cell disruption determines the quality and yields of the intracellular metabolites. The efficiencies of the cell wall disruption methods depend on cell wall strength (Joyce et al 2014). The composition and structure of the microalgal cell wall varies among strains.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neto et al [71] reported that for lipid extraction from diatom microalgae, sonication greatly impacted the cell disruption and improved the oil recovery. Joyce et al [80] reported that suspensions of Nannochloropsis oculata was unaffected by the ultrasound treatment as a result of varying microalgae cell wall thickness but Dunaliella salina and Chlorella concordia resulted in complete cell disruption with 4 min and 16 min sonication treatments, respectively. Nowotarski et al [76] reported that sonication of Dunnaliella salina was effectively disrupted at low concentrations while Nannochloropsis oculata was much more resistant to sonication even at long sonication exposures.…”
Section: Microalgae Typementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of high-intensity sonication can result in pressurize/heat that is damaging to the cells or tissue [67]. This technique can be species specific since it has been noted to be ineffective in the destruction of diatom species with thick cellular coating [76,78,80].…”
Section: Advantages and Disadvantagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies already highlighted the potential of ultrasound to disrupt algae cells, although the efficacy of the applied treatments (20 kHz, power 500 W) depended on the type of microalgae (Ranjan, Patil, & Moholkar, 2010). Recently, Joyce, King, and Mason (2014) reported that the efficacy of a 20 kHz US treatment to disrupt microalgae cells was specie dependent. Cell disruption of Dunaliella salina and Chlamydomonas concordia was observed after 4 and 16 min, respectively, while under the same conditions, there was no visible disruption for Nannochloropsis oculata (Joyce et al, 2014).…”
Section: Suitability Of Chlorine and Us To Disinfect Irrigation Watermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, Joyce, King, and Mason (2014) reported that the efficacy of a 20 kHz US treatment to disrupt microalgae cells was specie dependent. Cell disruption of Dunaliella salina and Chlamydomonas concordia was observed after 4 and 16 min, respectively, while under the same conditions, there was no visible disruption for Nannochloropsis oculata (Joyce et al, 2014). Based on these results, the types of algae present in the tested irrigation water seem to be relatively susceptible to the US treatments tested in this study.…”
Section: Suitability Of Chlorine and Us To Disinfect Irrigation Watermentioning
confidence: 99%