An automated and parallelised DIY-dosing unit for individual and complex feeding profiles: Construction, validation and applications

Since biotechnological research becomes more and more important for industrial applications, there is an increasing need for scalable and controllable laboratory procedures. A widely used approach in biotechnological research to improve the performance of a process is to vary the growth rates in order to find the right balance between growth and the production. This can be achieved by the application of a suitable feeding strategy. During this initial bioprocess development, it is beneficial to have at hand cheap and easy setups that work in parallel (e.g. in shaking flasks). Unfortunately, there is a gap between these easy setups and defined and controllable processes, which are necessary for up-scaling to an industrial relevant volume. One prerequisite to test and evaluate different process strategies apart from batch-mode is the availability of pump systems that allow for defined feeding profiles in shaking flasks. To our knowledge, there is no suitable dosing device on the market which fulfils the requirements of being cheap, precise, programmable, and parallelizable. Commercially available dosing units are either already integrated in bioreactors and therefore inflexible, or not programmable, or expensive, or a combination of those. Here, we present a LEGO-MINDSTORMS-based syringe pump, which has the potential of being widely used in daily laboratory routine due to its low price, programmability, and parallelisability. The acquisition costs do not exceed 350 € for up to four dosing units, that are independently controllable with one EV3 block. The system covers flow rates ranging from 0.7 μL min-1 up to 210 mL min-1 with a reliable flux. One dosing unit can convey at maximum a volume of 20 mL (using all 4 units even up to 80 mL in total) over the whole process time. The design of the dosing unit enables the user to perform experiments with up to four different growth rates in parallel (each measured in triplicates) per EV3-block used. We estimate, that the LEGO-MINDSTORMS-based dosing unit with 12 syringes in parallel is reducing the costs up to 50-fold compared to a trivial version of a commercial pump system (~1500 €) which fits the same requirements. Using the pump, we set the growth rates of a E. coli HMS174/DE3 culture to values between 0.1 and 0.4 h-1 with a standard deviation of at best 0.35% and an average discrepancy of 13.2%. Additionally, we determined the energy demand of a culture for the maintenance of the pTRA-51hd plasmid by quantifying the changes in biomass yield with different growth rates set. Around 25% of total substrate taken up is used for plasmid maintenance. To present possible applications and show the flexibility of the system, we applied a constant feed to perform microencapsulation of Pseudomonas putida and an individual dosing profile for the purification of a his-tagged eGFP via IMAC. This smart and versatile dosing unit, which is ready-to-use without any prior knowledge in electronics and control, is affordable for everyone and due to its flexibility and broad application range a valuable addition to the laboratory routine.

[1]  D Weuster-Botz,et al.  Parallel substrate feeding and pH-control in shaking-flasks. , 2001, Biochemical engineering journal.

[2]  Hendrik Dietz,et al.  Specific growth rate and multiplicity of infection affect high‐cell‐density fermentation with bacteriophage M13 for ssDNA production , 2017, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[3]  D. Riesenberg,et al.  High-cell-density cultivation of Escherichia coli. , 1991, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[4]  pTRA – A reporter system for monitoring the intracellular dynamics of gene expression , 2018, PloS one.

[5]  Barry Lennox,et al.  The development of an industrial-scale fed-batch fermentation simulation. , 2015, Journal of biotechnology.

[6]  T. Hwa,et al.  Overflow metabolism in E. coli results from efficient proteome allocation , 2015, Nature.

[7]  P. Lindner Purification of native proteins from the cytoplasm and periplasm of Escherichia coli using IMAC and histidine tails: A comparison of proteins and protocols , 1992 .

[8]  G. Stan,et al.  Quantifying cellular capacity identifies gene expression designs with reduced burden , 2015, Nature Methods.

[9]  T. Hwa,et al.  Inflating bacterial cells by increased protein synthesis , 2015, Molecular systems biology.

[10]  H. Chang,et al.  High cell density fed-batch cultivation of Escherichia coli using exponential feeding combined with pH-stat , 2004, Bioprocess and biosystems engineering.

[11]  Gorka Orive,et al.  History, challenges and perspectives of cell microencapsulation. , 2004, Trends in biotechnology.

[12]  Florian Groeber,et al.  Human barrier models for the in vitro assessment of drug delivery , 2017, Drug Delivery and Translational Research.

[13]  Germán L. Rosano,et al.  Recombinant protein expression in Escherichia coli: advances and challenges , 2014, Front. Microbiol..

[14]  Lucia L Prieto-Godino,et al.  The €100 lab: A 3D-printable open-source platform for fluorescence microscopy, optogenetics, and accurate temperature control during behaviour of zebrafish, Drosophila, and Caenorhabditis elegans , 2017, PLoS biology.

[15]  D. Weuster‐Botz,et al.  Influence of different packing methods on the hydrodynamic stability of chromatography columns. , 2017, Journal of chromatography. A.

[16]  K. Valgepea,et al.  Proteome reallocation in Escherichia coli with increasing specific growth rate. , 2015, Molecular bioSystems.

[17]  Ingmar H. Riedel-Kruse,et al.  Liquid-handling Lego robots and experiments for STEM education and research , 2017, PLoS biology.

[18]  A. Pacek,et al.  Process parameters for the high-scale production of alginate-encapsulated stem cells for storage and distribution throughout the cell therapy supply chain , 2017 .

[19]  J Büchs,et al.  Fed‐batch mode in shake flasks by slow‐release technique , 2006, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[20]  C. Kaleta,et al.  Metabolic network architecture and carbon source determine metabolite production costs , 2016, The FEBS journal.

[21]  T. Hwa,et al.  Coordination of bacterial proteome with metabolism by cyclic AMP signalling , 2013, Nature.

[22]  Dirk Weuster-Botz,et al.  Parallel steady state studies on a milliliter scale accelerate fed‐batch bioprocess design for recombinant protein production with Escherichia coli , 2016, Biotechnology progress.

[23]  S. Enfors,et al.  Modeling of Overflow Metabolism in Batch and Fed‐Batch Cultures of Escherichiacoli , 1999, Biotechnology progress.

[24]  J. Büchs,et al.  Dialysis shake flask for effective screening in fed-batch mode , 2012 .

[25]  Adam M. Feist,et al.  A genome-scale metabolic reconstruction for Escherichia coli K-12 MG1655 that accounts for 1260 ORFs and thermodynamic information , 2007, Molecular systems biology.

[26]  Garg Tarun,et al.  Patented Microencapsulation Techniques And Its Application , 2016 .

[27]  U. Alon,et al.  Glucose becomes one of the worst carbon sources for E.coli on poor nitrogen sources due to suboptimal levels of cAMP , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[28]  D. Weuster‐Botz,et al.  Feeding strategies enhance high cell density cultivation and protein expression in milliliter scale bioreactors. , 2014, Biotechnology journal.

[29]  V. Mureșan Particle Size Analysis by wet Laser Diffraction for anhydrous food suspensions: Application to sunflower tahini , 2018 .

[30]  G. Thallinger,et al.  Finished Genome Sequence of Escherichia coli K-12 Strain HMS174 (ATCC 47011) , 2014, Genome Announcements.

[31]  S. Prakash,et al.  Preparation and in vitro analysis of microencapsulated genetically engineered E. coli DH5 cells for urea and ammonia removal , 1995, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[32]  K. Han,et al.  Proteome response of Escherichia coli fed-batch culture to temperature downshift , 2005, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[33]  P. Kaiser,et al.  Cell retention by encapsulation for the cultivation of Jurkat cells in fixed and fluidized bed reactors , 2014, Biotechnology and Bioengineering.

[34]  Todd C McDevitt,et al.  Stem cell microencapsulation for phenotypic control, bioprocessing, and transplantation , 2013, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[35]  A. G. Marr,et al.  Growth rate of Escherichia coli. , 1991, Microbiological reviews.

[36]  P. Czermak,et al.  Cultivation and Differentiation of Encapsulated hMSC-TERT in a Disposable Small-Scale Syringe-Like Fixed Bed Reactor , 2007, The open biomedical engineering journal.

[37]  J. Büchs,et al.  Advances in shaking technologies. , 2012, Trends in biotechnology.

[38]  Gorka Orive,et al.  Cell microencapsulation technology: towards clinical application. , 2008, Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society.

[39]  C. Connon,et al.  Alginate‐Encapsulation for the Improved Hypothermic Preservation of Human Adipose‐Derived Stem Cells , 2016, Stem cells translational medicine.

[40]  Krist V. Gernaey,et al.  A review of control strategies for manipulating the feed rate in fed-batch fermentation processes. , 2017, Journal of biotechnology.

[41]  T. Hwa,et al.  Emergence of robust growth laws from optimal regulation of ribosome synthesis , 2014, Molecular systems biology.

[42]  A. Kremling,et al.  Metabolic engineering to expand the substrate spectrum of Pseudomonas putida toward sucrose , 2017, MicrobiologyOpen.

[43]  Sehyun Shin,et al.  Density-dependent separation of encapsulated cells in a microfluidic channel by using a standing surface acoustic wave. , 2012, Biomicrofluidics.

[44]  Donghui Jing,et al.  Cardiac Cell Generation from Encapsulated Embryonic Stem Cells in Static and Scalable Culture Systems , 2010, Cell transplantation.

[45]  Peter Neubauer,et al.  Microbial Cell Factories BioMed Central , 2008 .