Method for extracting hydrophobin from a solution
Process for extracting hydrophobin from a solution wherein carrageenan is added to the solution and the pH of the solution is brought below 3.5, and the ionic strength of the solution is below 0.5.
Latest Conopco, Inc. Patents:
This application is a reissue of U.S. Pat. No. 8,354,503 B2, which was filed Dec. 11, 2009, and was assigned U.S. application Ser. No. 12/636,157, which claims the benefit of European Application No. 08171868.6, filed Dec. 16, 2009. The entire contents of the above-identified applications are hereby incorporated by reference.
TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTIONThe present invention relates to method for extracting hydrophobin from a solution. In particular it relates to a method for extracting hydrophobin in a fermentation process.
BACKGROUND TO THE INVENTIONFoaming is a common problem in aerobic, submerged fermentations. Foaming is caused by the sparging of gas into the fermentation medium for the purpose of providing oxygen for the growth of the aerobic organism being cultivated (e.g. bacteria, yeasts, fungi, algae, cell cultures). If the fermentation medium contains surface active components such as proteins, polysaccharides or fatty acids, then foam can be formed on the surface of the medium as the sparged gas bubbles disengage from the liquid. Foaming creates a number of problems including the undesirable stripping of product, nutrients, and cells into the foam, and can make process containment difficult. A known method for controlling foaming is to use antifoams, of which several types are commonly used: silicone-based (e.g. polydimethylsiloxanes), polyalkylene glycols (e.g. polypropylene glycol), fatty acids, polyesters and natural oils (e.g. linseed oil, soybean oil). Antifoams replace foam-forming components on bubble surfaces, resulting in destruction of the foam by bubble coalescence. Antifoams are added at the start of and/or during the fermentation.
When the fermentation product is intended for use in foods, personal products or medicine, it is highly desirable that the product is excreted by the producing organism into the fermentation medium (i.e. extra-cellular, rather than intra-cellular production). This avoids the need to disrupt the cells by physical or chemical means in order to release the product for recovery. By maintaining the cells intact, the cellular material can be easily separated from the product so that it is free of intracellular and genetic material which is usually regarded as an undesirable contaminant. This can be especially important when the producing organism has been genetically modified. However, extra-cellular production may intensify the degree of foaming in the fermenter, especially if the product facilitates foam formation or enhances foam stability, for example a biosurfactant or a hydrophobin. The use of antifoams presents a particular problem in the extra-cellular production of such foaming agents for two reasons: firstly the amount of antifoam required is increased because the foaming agent itself contributes to foaming in the fermenter. Secondly, it is not necessary to remove the antifoam from most fermentation products since it is present in low concentrations which do not affect the functionality of the product. However, when the fermentation product is a foaming agent, the antifoam must be substantially removed since the presence of antifoam in the product will impair its functionality.
Bailey et al, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 58 (2002) pp 721-727 disclose the production of hydrophobins HFB I and HFB II by the fermentation of transformants of Trichoderma reesei. An antifoam (Struktol J633) was used to prevent foaming and the hydrophobin was purified using aqueous two phase extraction. However separation methods such as aqueous two phase extraction or chromatographic processes are expensive and may require food-incompatible chemicals.
It has now been found that, rather than removing the antifoam from the solution it is possible to remove the hydrophobin.
TESTS AND DEFINITIONSHydrophobins
Hydrophobins can be obtained by culturing filamentous fungi such as hyphomycetes (e.g. Trichoderma), basidiomycetes and ascomycetes. Particularly preferred hosts are food grade organisms, such as Cryphonectria parasitica which secretes a hydrophobin termed cryparin (MacCabe and Van Alfen, 1999, App. Environ. Microbiol 65: 5431-5435). Similarly, surfactin can be obtained from Bacillus subtilis and glycolipids from e.g. Pseudomanas aeruginosa, Rhodococcus erythropolis, Mycobacterium species and Torulopsis bombicola (Desai and Banat, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, March, 1997, pp 47-64).
In EP 1 623 631 we have previously found that hydrophobins allow the production of aqueous foams with excellent stability to disproportionation and coalescence. Because hydrophobins are highly effective foaming agents, their presence in the fermentation medium presents a particular challenge for foam control.
Hydrophobins are a well-defined class of proteins (Wessels, 1997, Adv. Microb. Physio. 38: 1-45; Wosten, 2001, Annu Rev. Microbiol. 55: 625-646) capable of self-assembly at a hydrophobic/hydrophilic interface, and having a conserved sequence:
where X represents any amino acid, and n and m independently represent an integer. Typically, a hydrophobin has a length of up to 125 amino acids. The cysteine residues (C) in the conserved sequence are part of disulphide bridges. In the context of the present invention, the term hydrophobin has a wider meaning to include functionally equivalent proteins still displaying the characteristic of self-assembly at a hydrophobic-hydrophilic interface resulting in a protein film, such as proteins comprising the sequence:
or parts thereof still displaying the characteristic of self-assembly at a hydrophobic-hydrophilic interface resulting in a protein film. In accordance with the definition of the present invention, self-assembly can be detected by adsorbing the protein to Teflon and using Circular Dichroism to establish the presence of a secondary structure (in general, α-helix) (De Vocht et al., 1998, Biophys. J. 74: 2059-68).
The formation of a film can be established by incubating a Teflon sheet in the protein solution followed by at least three washes with water or buffer (Wosten et al., 1994, Embo. J. 13: 5848-54). The protein film can be visualised by any suitable method, such as labeling with a fluorescent marker or by the use of fluorescent antibodies, as is well established in the art, m and n typically have values ranging from 0 to 2000, but more usually m and n in total are less than 100 or 200. The definition of hydrophobin in the context of the present invention includes fusion proteins of a hydrophobin and another polypeptide as well as conjugates of hydrophobin and other molecules such as polysaccharides.
Hydrophobins identified to date are generally classed as either class I or class II. Both types have been identified in fungi as secreted proteins that self-assemble at hydrophobilic interfaces into amphipathic films. Assemblages of class I hydrophobins are generally relatively insoluble whereas those of class II hydrophobins readily dissolve in a variety of solvents. Preferably the hydrophobin is soluble in water, by which is meant that it is at least 0.1% soluble in water, preferably at least 0.5%. By at least 0.1% soluble is meant that no hydrophobin precipitates when 0.1 g of hydrophobin in 99.9 mL of water is subjected to 30,000 g centrifugation for 30 minutes at 20° C.
Hydrophobin-like proteins (e.g. “chaplins”) have also been identified in filamentous bacteria, such as Actinomycete and Streptomyces sp. (WO01/74864; Talbot, 2003, Curr. Biol, 13: R696-R698). These bacterial proteins by contrast to fungal hydrophobins, may form only up to one disulphide bridge since they may have only two cysteine residues. Such proteins are an example of functional equivalents to hydrophobins having the consensus sequences shown in SEQ ID NOs. 1 and 2, and are within the scope of the present invention.
More than 34 genes coding for hydrophobins have been cloned, from over 16 fungal species (see for example WO96/41882 which gives the sequence of hydrophobins identified in Agaricus bisporus; and Wosten, 2001, Annu Rev. Microbiol. 55: 625-646). For the purpose of the invention hydrophobins possessing at least 80% identity at the amino acid level to a hydrophobin that naturally occurs are also embraced within the term “hydrophobins”.
Antifoams
The term “antifoam” includes both antifoams which are usually added before foaming occurs and also those which are usually added once the foam has formed (sometimes known as defoamers). A definition of antifoams used in the present invention is found in “Foam and its mitigation in fermentation systems”—Beth Junker—Biotechnology Progress, 2007, 23, 768-784.
Fermentation Process
The fermentation to produce hydrophobin is carried out by culturing the host cell in a liquid fermentation medium within a bioreactor (e.g. an industrial fermenter). The composition of the medium (e.g. nutrients, carbon source etc.), temperature and pH are chosen to provide appropriate conditions for growth of the culture and/or production of the foaming agent. Air or oxygen-enriched air is normally sparged into the medium to provide oxygen for respiration of the culture.
The antifoam may be included in the initial medium composition and/or added as required through the period of the fermentation. Common practice is to employ a foam detection method, such as a conductivity probe, which automatically triggers addition of the antifoam. In the present invention, the antifoam is preferably present at a final concentration of from 0.1 to 20 g/L, more preferably from 1 to 10 g/L.
The fermenter temperature during step i), i.e. during fermentation, may be above or below the cloud point of the antifoam. Preferably the fermenter temperature is above the cloud point of the antifoam, since the antifoam is most effective at causing bubble coalescence and foam collapse above its cloud point. The fermenter temperature is generally chosen to achieve optimum conditions for growth of the host cells and/or production.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTIONIt is the object of the invention to provide a process for extracting hydrophobin from a solution wherein carrageenan is added to the solution and the pH of the solution is brought below 3.5, preferably below 3.
In a first preferred embodiment of the invention, the solution is then filtered to produce a retentate and a filtrate, hydrophobin being recovered from the retentate. In a second preferred embodiment of the invention, the solution is submitted to a centrifugation step to produce a supernatant which is removed, leaving a remaining phase. Hydrophobin is then removed from the remaining phase.
Preferably, the process comprises the step of cultivating a host cell in a fermentation medium wherein the host cell extra-cellularly secretes hydrophobin; and the fermentation medium contains an antifoam. More preferably, the fermentation medium is aerated by sparging air or oxygen-enriched air into it.
Preferably the hydrophobin is HFBI or HFBII from Trichoderma reesei.
Preferably the host cell is a genetically-modified fungus, more preferably a yeast, most preferably Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Preferably the ionic strength of the solution is below 0.5, preferably below 0.4, more preferably below 0.3, even more preferably below 0.2
Preferably, carrageenan is kappa or iota carrageenan, more preferably iota carrageenan.
Preferably also the carrageenan/hydrophobin ratio (w/w) is between 1:10 and 10:1, preferably above 1:5, more preferably above 1:1.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTIONThe present invention will be further described in the following examples wherein the hydrophobin is always HFB II.
Example 1 ComparativeStarting concentration 145.4 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution. The solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 67.9 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3.
There for 93% of the original hydrophobin filtered through.
Example 2 ComparativeStarting concentration 146.3 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM sodium Citrate. The solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 68.0 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3.
Therefore again 93% of the original hydrophobin filtered through.
Example 3 InventionStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+1% kappa carrageenan sheared gel. The solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 3.8 μg/cm3 hydrophobin in 9 cm3.
Therefore, only 5% of the hydrophobin filtered through.
Then 9 cm3 of 25 mM sodium citrate at pH 8 were passed through filter. The concentration in the filtrate was 40.9 μg/ml, therefore 56% of the original hydrophobin was recovered that way.
Example 4 ComparativeStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+1% kappa carrageenan sheared gel.
Then add 0.325 cm3 NaOH (to go to pH 7.0) and filter
Concentration in filtrate=75.6 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3
Here, 100% of the hydrophobin ended in the filtrate despite the use of carrageenan, showing the importance of pH.
Example 5 InventionStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+1% kappa carrageenan sheared gel.
Then add solid NaCl to give a concentration of 0.5M NaCl and filter. The concentration in filtrate is 50.9 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3. So, about 70% of the original amount of hydrophobin filtered through despite the right pH and the use of 1% kappa carrageenan sheared gel.
Then 9 cm3 of 25 mM sodium citrate at pH 8 passed through filter leading to a concentration in filtrate of 13.8 μg/cm3. Therefore, only 19% of the hydrophobin was recovered that way, showing the influence of the ionic strength on the whole process. The higher the ionic strength, the lower the recovery, everything else being equal.
Example 6a InventionStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+0.025% iota carrageenan.
The concentration in filtrate was 1.6 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3, only 2% of the original hydrophobin having passed through.
Then 9 cm3 of 25 mM sodium citrate at pH 8 passed through filter, leading to a concentration in filtrate=29.5 μg/cm3
Over 40% of the original hydrophobin was recovered.
Example 6b InventionStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+0.025% kappa carrageenan.
The concentration in filtrate was 28.4 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3, 39% of the original hydrophobin having passed through.
This example shows that iota carrageenan performs better that kappa carrageenan when retaining hydrophobin
Example 7 ComparativeStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid solution+1% sheared pectin.
The concentration in filtrate was 57.3 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3, representing 79% of the original hydrophobin, showing that pectin does not work.
Example 8 ComparativeStarting concentration 145.9 μg/cm3 of hydrophobin in 4.5 cm3 of a 25 mM citric acid and 1% N creamer 46.
The concentration in filtrate was 64.2 μg/cm3 in 9 cm3 representing 88% of the original hydrophobin, showing that hydrophobic starch does not work.
Claims
1. Process for extracting hydrophobin from a solution comprising the steps of:
- a) adding carrageenan to the solution;
- b) adjusting the pH of the solution to below 3.5;
- c) filtering the solution to produce a retentate and a filtrate; and
- d) recovering the hydrophobin from the retentate;
- e) centrifuging the solution to produce a supernatant which is removed, leaving a remaining phase; and
- f) removing the hydrophobin from the remaining phase;
- wherein the resulting hydrophobin is suitable for use in foods, personal care products and medicine.
2. Process according to claim 1 further comprising the step of cultivating a host cell in the solution including a fermentation medium wherein the host cell extra-cellularly secretes hydrophobin; and the fermentation medium contains an antifoam.
3. Process according to claim 2 wherein the host cell is a genetically-modified fungus.
4. Process according to claim 3 wherein the host cell is a yeast.
5. Process according to claim 4 wherein the host cell is Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
6. Process according to claim 1 wherein the hydrophobin is HFBI or HFBII from Trichoderma reesei.
7. Process according to claim 1 wherein the solution has an ionic strength below 0.5.
8. Process according to claim 1 wherein the carrageenan is kappa or iota carrageenan.
9. Process according to claim 8 wherein the carrageenan is iota carrageenan.
10. Process according to claim 1 wherein the carrageenan/hydrophobin ratio (w/w) is between 1:10 and 10:1.
11. Process according to claim 1 wherein the carrageenan is a shear gel.
12. Process for extracting hydrophobin from a solution comprising the steps of:
- a) adding carrageenan to the solution;
- b) adjusting the pH of the solution to below 3.5;
- c) centrifuging the solution to produce a supernatant which is removed, leaving a remaining phase; and
- d) removing the hydrophobin from the remaining phase;
- wherein the resulting hydrophobin is suitable for use in foods, personal care products and medicine.
13. Process according to claim 12 further comprising the step of cultivating a host cell in the solution including a fermentation medium wherein the host cell extra-cellularly secretes hydrophobin; and the fermentation medium contains an antifoam.
14. Process according to claim 13 wherein the host cell is a genetically-modified fungus.
15. Process according to claim 14 wherein the host cell is a yeast.
16. Process according to claim 15 wherein the host cell is Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
17. Process according to claim 12 wherein the hydrophobin is HFBI or HFBII from Trichoderma reesei.
18. Process according to claim 12 wherein the solution has an ionic strength below 0.5.
19. Process according to claim 12 wherein the carrageenan is kappa or iota carrageenan.
20. Process according to claim 19 wherein the carrageenan is iota carrageenan.
21. Process according to claim 12 wherein the carrageenan/hydrophobin ratio (w/w) is between 1:10 and 10:1.
22. Process according to claim 12 wherein the carrageenan is a shear gel.
2604406 | July 1952 | Blihovde |
2844470 | July 1958 | Akerboom et al. |
2937093 | May 1960 | Gorman et al. |
2970017 | February 1961 | Melnick |
2970917 | February 1961 | Melnick |
3266214 | August 1966 | Kramme |
3346387 | October 1967 | Moncrieff et al. |
3914441 | October 1975 | Finney et al. |
3946122 | March 23, 1976 | Scharp |
4066794 | January 3, 1978 | Schur |
4146652 | March 27, 1979 | Kahn et al. |
4305964 | December 15, 1981 | Moran et al. |
4325980 | April 20, 1982 | Rek et al. |
4425369 | January 10, 1984 | Sakamoto et al. |
4542035 | September 17, 1985 | Huang et al. |
4627631 | December 9, 1986 | Sherman |
4627983 | December 9, 1986 | Scharf et al. |
4629628 | December 16, 1986 | Negro |
4668519 | May 26, 1987 | Dartey et al. |
4869915 | September 26, 1989 | Inayoshi et al. |
4874627 | October 17, 1989 | Greig et al. |
4946625 | August 7, 1990 | O'Lenick |
4954440 | September 4, 1990 | Johal et al. |
4960540 | October 2, 1990 | Friel et al. |
5084295 | January 28, 1992 | Whelan et al. |
5104674 | April 14, 1992 | Chen et al. |
5202147 | April 13, 1993 | Traska et al. |
5208028 | May 4, 1993 | Clement et al. |
5215777 | June 1, 1993 | Asher et al. |
5336514 | August 9, 1994 | Jones et al. |
5393549 | February 28, 1995 | Badertscher et al. |
5397592 | March 14, 1995 | Vermaas et al. |
5436021 | July 25, 1995 | Bodor et al. |
5486372 | January 23, 1996 | Martin et al. |
5536514 | July 16, 1996 | Bishay et al. |
5620732 | April 15, 1997 | Clemmings et al. |
5624612 | April 29, 1997 | Sewall et al. |
5681505 | October 28, 1997 | Phillips et al. |
5738897 | April 14, 1998 | Gidley |
5770248 | June 23, 1998 | Liebfred et al. |
5980969 | November 9, 1999 | Mordini et al. |
6063602 | May 16, 2000 | Prosperi et al. |
6096867 | August 1, 2000 | Byass et al. |
6187365 | February 13, 2001 | Vaghela et al. |
6238714 | May 29, 2001 | Binder et al. |
6284303 | September 4, 2001 | Rowe et al. |
6497913 | December 24, 2002 | Gray et al. |
6579557 | June 17, 2003 | Benjamins et al. |
6685977 | February 3, 2004 | Asano et al. |
6914043 | July 5, 2005 | Chapman et al. |
7338779 | March 4, 2008 | Nakari-Setala et al. |
8178151 | May 15, 2012 | Bramley et al. |
8206770 | June 26, 2012 | Aldred et al. |
8216624 | July 10, 2012 | Berry et al. |
8354503 | January 15, 2013 | Hedges et al. |
8357420 | January 22, 2013 | Cox et al. |
8394444 | March 12, 2013 | Cox et al. |
20010048962 | December 6, 2001 | Fenn et al. |
20020085987 | July 4, 2002 | Brown et al. |
20020155208 | October 24, 2002 | Benjamins et al. |
20020182300 | December 5, 2002 | Groh et al. |
20020197375 | December 26, 2002 | Adolphi et al. |
20030087017 | May 8, 2003 | Hanselmann et al. |
20030099751 | May 29, 2003 | Aldred et al. |
20030134025 | July 17, 2003 | Vaghela et al. |
20030148400 | August 7, 2003 | Haikara et al. |
20030166960 | September 4, 2003 | de Vocht et al. |
20030175407 | September 18, 2003 | Kunst et al. |
20030190402 | October 9, 2003 | McBride |
20040109930 | June 10, 2004 | Hooft et al. |
20040161503 | August 19, 2004 | Malone et al. |
20040185162 | September 23, 2004 | Finnigan et al. |
20050037110 | February 17, 2005 | Windhab et al. |
20050058058 | March 17, 2005 | Cho et al. |
20050123666 | June 9, 2005 | Vaghela et al. |
20050123668 | June 9, 2005 | Kodali et al. |
20050129810 | June 16, 2005 | Lindner et al. |
20050193744 | September 8, 2005 | Cockings et al. |
20060024417 | February 2, 2006 | Berry et al. |
20060024419 | February 2, 2006 | Aldred et al. |
20070014908 | January 18, 2007 | Bramley et al. |
20070071865 | March 29, 2007 | Aldred et al. |
20070071866 | March 29, 2007 | Cox et al. |
20070116848 | May 24, 2007 | Aldred et al. |
20070286936 | December 13, 2007 | Bramley et al. |
20070298490 | December 27, 2007 | Sweigard et al. |
20080175972 | July 24, 2008 | Cox |
20080254180 | October 16, 2008 | Windhab et al. |
20080305237 | December 11, 2008 | Beltman et al. |
20090136433 | May 28, 2009 | Subkowski et al. |
20090142467 | June 4, 2009 | Aldred et al. |
20100303998 | December 2, 2010 | Cox et al. |
271999 | June 1927 | CA |
1094866 | October 2003 | CA |
1218557 | November 2004 | CA |
101054407 | October 2007 | CN |
101215321 | July 2008 | CN |
29715519 | November 1997 | DE |
102004038685 | February 2006 | DE |
216270 | April 1987 | EP |
0274348 | July 1988 | EP |
0285198 | October 1988 | EP |
0322952 | July 1989 | EP |
0336817 | October 1989 | EP |
0426211 | May 1991 | EP |
0426211 | May 1991 | EP |
0469656 | February 1992 | EP |
0521543 | January 1993 | EP |
0477825 | December 1996 | EP |
775444 | May 1997 | EP |
0777969 | June 1997 | EP |
0777969 | June 1997 | EP |
0930017 | July 1999 | EP |
0930017 | July 1999 | EP |
1061006 | December 2000 | EP |
1074181 | February 2001 | EP |
0747301 | August 2001 | EP |
0783254 | August 2001 | EP |
0919134 | November 2001 | EP |
0771531 | September 2002 | EP |
1284106 | February 2003 | EP |
0995685 | April 2003 | EP |
1400486 | March 2004 | EP |
1520483 | April 2005 | EP |
1520484 | April 2005 | EP |
1520485 | April 2005 | EP |
1557092 | July 2005 | EP |
1621084 | February 2006 | EP |
1621084 | February 2006 | EP |
1623631 | February 2006 | EP |
1626361 | February 2006 | EP |
1541034 | June 2006 | EP |
1849461 | October 2007 | EP |
2052628 | April 2009 | EP |
2052628 | April 2009 | EP |
459583 | January 1937 | GB |
1556297 | November 1979 | GB |
530006491 | January 1978 | JP |
530006491 | July 1978 | JP |
61219342 | September 1986 | JP |
61293348 | December 1986 | JP |
03164156 | July 1991 | JP |
3244348 | October 1991 | JP |
08500486 | January 1996 | JP |
2005278484 | October 2005 | JP |
2004018844 | March 2004 | KR |
WO9013571 | November 1990 | WO |
WO9111109 | August 1991 | WO |
WO9222581 | December 1992 | WO |
WO9403617 | February 1994 | WO |
WO9412050 | June 1994 | WO |
WO9413154 | June 1994 | WO |
WO9523843 | September 1995 | WO |
WO9611586 | April 1996 | WO |
WO9621362 | July 1996 | WO |
WO9639878 | December 1996 | WO |
WO9641882 | December 1996 | WO |
WO9804148 | February 1998 | WO |
WO9804699 | February 1998 | WO |
WO9937673 | July 1999 | WO |
WO9954725 | October 1999 | WO |
WO0022936 | April 2000 | WO |
WO0053026 | September 2000 | WO |
WO0058342 | October 2000 | WO |
WO0114521 | March 2001 | WO |
WO0135756 | May 2001 | WO |
WO0157076 | August 2001 | WO |
WO0174864 | October 2001 | WO |
WO0183534 | November 2001 | WO |
WO0184945 | November 2001 | WO |
WO03015530 | February 2003 | WO |
WO03051136 | June 2003 | WO |
WO03053383 | July 2003 | WO |
WO03053883 | July 2003 | WO |
WO03096821 | November 2003 | WO |
WO2005058055 | June 2005 | WO |
WO2005058067 | June 2005 | WO |
WO2005102067 | November 2005 | WO |
WO2005113387 | December 2005 | WO |
WO2005113387 | December 2005 | WO |
WO2006010425 | February 2006 | WO |
WO2007087967 | August 2007 | WO |
WO2008031796 | March 2008 | WO |
WO2008116733 | October 2008 | WO |
WO2009047657 | April 2009 | WO |
WO2010067059 | June 2010 | WO |
WO2010067059 | June 2010 | WO |
- Jan. 1, 2005, Fats Oils Fatty Acids Triglycerides, Scientific Psychic, 1-4.
- Jun. 14, 2010, Guar Gum, Guargum.biz, 1.
- Oct. 16, 2009, Search proteins matching the sequence pattern used for the hydrophobin definition in patent EP 1926 399 B1, Nestle Research Center, 1-3.
- Arbuckle, Jan. 1, 1972, Ice Cream, Ice Cream 2nd Ed, pp. 15, 18, 31, 35, 61, 65, 265-266 and 284-285.
- Askolin, et al., Aug. 9, 2001, Overproduction purification and characterization of Trichoderma reesei hydrophobin HFBI, Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 57, 124-130.
- Askolin, et al., Jan. 10, 2006, Interaction & comparison of a Class I Hydrophobin from schizophyllum commune & Class II Hydro form trichoderma reesei, Biomacromolecules, 7, 1295-1301.
- Bailey, et al., Jan. 31, 2002, Process Technol effects of deletion & amplification of hydrophobins I & II in transformants of Trich reesei, Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 58, 721-727.
- Bay, Jan. 1, 2002, La Cucina Italiana Italian Cuisine, Edizioni Piemme, *, 1233.
- Berolzheimer, Jan. 1, 1988, Culinary Arts Institute Encyclopedic Cookbook, Culinart Arts Institute, *, 648.
- Calonje, et al., Dec. 13, 2002, Properties of a hydrophobin isolated from the mycoparasitic fungus verticillium fungicola, Can J Microbiol, 48, 1030-1034.
- Chaisalee, et al., Oct. 1, 2003, Mechanism of Antifoam Behavior of Solutions of Nonionic Surfactants Above the Cloud Point, Journal of Surfactants & Detergents, 6, No. 4, 345-351.
- Chakraborty, et al., Jan. 1, 1972, Stabilization of Calcium Sensitive Plant Proteins by k-Carrageenan, Journal of Food Science, 37, 719-721.
- Cheer, et al., Jan. 1, 1983, Effects of Sucrose on the Rheological Behavior of Wheat Starch Pastes, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 28, 1829-1836.
- Collen, et al., Jan. 15, 2002, A novel two-step extraction method w detergent polymer sys for primary recovery of the fusion protein endoglucanase I-hydro I, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 1569, No. 1-3, 139-150.
- CP Kelco US Inc., Apr. 17, 2007, Certificate of Analysis for Keltrol RD, CP Kelco, *, 1.
- CRC Jan. 1, 2008, Fennema's Food Chemistry, CRC Press, 4th Ed., pp. 727-728, Taylor & Francis Group.
- Cruse, May 26, 1970, Whipped Soup is Tasty, St. Petersberg Independant, ., B-4, p. 1.
- Damodaran, Oct. 27, 2004, Adsorbed layers formed from mixtures of proteins, Current Opinion to Colloid & Interface Science, 9, 328-339.
- Davis, et al., Jan. 1, 2001, Application of foaming for the recovery of surfactin from B. subtilis ATCC 21332 cultures, Enzyme & Microbial Technology, 28, 346-354.
- De Vocht et al., Apr. 1998, Structural Characterization of the Hydrophobin SC3, as a Monomer and after Self-Assembly at Hydrophobic/Hydrophilic Interfaces, Biophysical Journal, 74, 2059-2068.
- De Vries, et al., Mar. 2, 1999, Identification & characterization of a tri-partite hydrophobin from Claviceps fusiformis, Eur J Biochem, 262, 377-385.
- Dictionary.com, Jun. 14, 2010, Stabilizer, Dictionary.com, *, 1-5.
- Dr. E. Kododziejcxzyk, Nov. 16, 2009, Adsortion of different proteins to Teflon sheets: Experimental Results, Nestle Research Center, pp. 1-10.
- Fellows, 2000, Principles and Practice, Food processing technology, 2nd, 83, 140, 429, Foodhead Publishing.
- Goh, Apr. 8, 2002, Applications and Uses of Palm and Palm Kernel Oils, Malaysian Oil Science and Technology, 11, 46-50.
- Grant, Jan. 1, 1987, Grant & Hackh's Chemical Dictionary, McGraw-Hill, 5th Ed, 212.
- Guner, et al., Jan. 1, 2007, Production of yogurt ice cream at different acidity, Intl Journ of Food Sc & Tech, 42, 948-952.
- Hakanpaa, et al., Jan. 2, 2004, Atomic Resolution Structure of the HFBII Hydrophobin a Self-assembling Amphiphile, Journal of Biological Chemistry, 279, No. 1, 534-539.
- Holmes, et al., Oct. 10, 2006, Evaluation of antifoams in the expression of a recombinant FC fusion protein in shake flask cultures, Microbial Cell Factories, 5, No. 1, pp. 1-3.
- Hung, et al., Aug. 20, 2007, Cloud-point extraction of selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by nonionic surfactants, Separation & Purification Tech, 57, 1-10.
- Hunter, et al., Jan. 1, 2008, The role of particles in stabilising foams and emulsions, Advances in Colloid & Interface Science, 137, 57-81.
- Katzbauer et al, Jun. 19, 1997, Properties and applications of xanthan gum, Polymer Degradation and Stability, vol. 59, 81-84, Elsevier.
- Kershaw, et al., Jan. 1, 1998, Hydrophobins and Repellents Proteins with Fundamental Roles in Fungal Morphogenesis, Genetics & Biology, 23, 18-33.
- Kilcast et al., Jun. 20, 2002, Sensory perception of creaminess and its relationship with food structure, Food Quality and Preference, 13, 609-623.
- Kloek, et al., Feb. 2, 2001, Effect of Bulk and Interfacial Rheological Properties on Bubble Dissolution, Journal of Colloid & Interface Sc, 237, 158-166.
- Lambou et al., 1973, Whey Solids as Agricultural Foam Stabilizers, Jr. of Agr. and Food Chemistry, 21 No. 2, 257-263.
- Linder, Jan. 21, 2005, Hydrophobins: the protein-amphiphiles of filamentous fungi, Microbiology Reviews, vol. 29 No. 5, 877-896.
- Linder, et al., Jul. 1, 2001, The hydrophobins HFBI & HFBII from Trichoderma reesei showing efficient interatctions w nonionic surfactants in aqueous two-phase sys, Biomacromolecules, 2, No. 2, 511, 514, 515, 516.
- Lumsdon, et al., Sep. 1, 2005, Adsorption of hydrophobin proteins at hydrophobic & hydrophilic interfaces, Colloids & Surfaces, 44, 172-178.
- Marshall, Jan. 1, 2003, Ice Cream, Springer, 6th Ed, 70-73.
- Martin, et al., Jan. 14, 2000, Sc30 Hydrophobin Organization in Aqueous Media & Assembly onto Surfaces as Mediated by Assoc Polysaccharide Schizophyllan, Biomacromolecules, 1, 49-58.
- Mathlouthi, et al., Jan. 1, 1995, Rheological properties of sucrose solutions and suspensions, Sucrose Properties & Applic, *, 126-154.
- McCabe, et al., Dec. 1, 1999, Secretion of Cryparin a Fungal Hydrophobin, Applied & Environmental Microbiology, 65, No. 12, 5431-5435.
- McGregor, et al., Jan. 1, 1988, Antifoam effects on ultrafiltration, Biotechnology & Bioengineering, 31, No. 4, 385-389.
- Minor, et al., Jan. 1, 2009, Preparation and sensory perception of fat-free foams effect of matrix properties and level of aeration, Intl Journ of Food Sc & Tech, 44, 735-747.
- Murray, Aug. 3, 2007, Stabilization of bubbles and foams, Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science, 12, 232-241.
- Wang et al, Protease A Stability of Beer Foam II, China Academic Journal, May 31, 2004, pp. 11-15, ., CN.
- Research pushes the right buttons, mushrooms are the new fat, University of Birmingham, Feb. 25, 2008, pp. 1-2.
- Cox, et al., Jan. 1, 2009, Exceptional Stability of food foams using class II hydrophobin HFBII, Food Hydrocolloids, 23, 366-376.
- Cox, et al., Jun. 20, 2007, Surface Properties of Class II Hydrophobins from Trichoderma reesei & Influence on bubble stability, Langmuir, 23, 7995-8002.
- Pardun, 1977, Soy Protein Preparations as Antispattering Agents for Margarine, Fette Seifen Anstrichmittel, vol. 79, No. 5, pp. 195-203 (Abstract Only).
- Samsudin, 2010, Low-Fat Chocolate Spread Based on Palm Oil, retrieved from Internet: http://palmoils.mpob.gov.my/pulibcations/pod45-salmi.pdf, pp. 27-30.
- Kinderlerer, 1997, Chrysosporium species, potential spoilage organisms of chocolate, Jr. of Applied Microbiology, vol. 83, pp. 771-778.
- Scott et al., 1983, Influence of Temperature on the Measurement of Water Activity of Food and Salt Systems, Journal of Food Science, vol. 48, pp. 552-554.
- Co-Pending application Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/525,060, filed Sep. 21, 2006; pp. 1-32.
- Co-Pending application Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,977, filed Sep. 21, 2006; pp. 1-39.
- Co-pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/524,675, filed Sep. 21, 2006, pp. 1-19.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/699,601, filed Jan. 30, 2007, pp. 1-28.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/699,602, filed Jan. 30, 2007, pp. 1-26.
- Co-Pending application Burmester et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/002,684, filed Dec. 18, 2007, pp. 1-35.
- Co-Pending application Burmester et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/091,796, filed Apr. 21, 2011, pp. 1-35.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/682,717, filed Apr. 12, 2010; pp. 1-27.
- Co-Pending application Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/287,957, filed Oct. 15, 2008; pp. 1-28.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/578,752, filed Oct. 14, 2009; pp. 1-14.
- Co-Pending application Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/788,395, filed May 27, 2010; pp. 1-13.
- Co-Pending application Watts et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/788,419, filed May 27, 2010; pp. 1-15.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/532,667, filed Sep. 23, 2009; pp. 1-18.
- Co-Pending application Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/532,670, filed Sep. 23, 2009; pp. 1-23.
- Co-Pending application Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/378,143, filed Feb. 10, 2012; pp. 1-15.
- Co-Pending application Mitchell et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/498,157, filed Mar. 26, 2012; pp. 1-16.
- Co-Pending application Deborah Lynne Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/992,299, filed Jun. 7, 2013, pp. 1-11.
- Co-Pending application Deborah Lynne Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/989,820, filed Jun. 21, 2013, pp. 1-11.
- Co-Pending application Deborah Lynne Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/982,292, filed Jul. 29, 2013.
- Co-Pending application Andrew Richard Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 13/585,257, filed Aug. 14, 2012, pp. 1-32.
- Co-Pending application Aumaitre et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/409,549, filed Mar. 24, 2009; pp. 1-19.
- Co-Pending application Cox, U.S. Appl. No. 13/878,491, filed Apr. 9, 2013; pp. 1-20.
- Askolin, S., Characterization of the Trichoderma resel hydrophobins HFBI and HFBII, VTT Publication 601, May 2006, 1-99 ; I1-I19; VI1-V120.
- Notice of Opposition and Grounds of Opposition, dated Dec. 23, 2009—Nestec S.A./Unilever N.V. (EP1926399).
- Response to Notice of Opposition, dated Oct. 29, 2010—Nestec S.A./Unilever N.V. (EP1926399).
- Talbot et al. (1996) MPG1 Encodes a Fungal Hydrophobin Involved in Surface Interactions during Infection-Related Development of Magnaporthe grisea, Plant Cell., vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 985-999.
- Martin et al. (2000) Sc3p hydrophobin organization in aqueous media and assembly onto surfaces as mediated by the associated polysaccharide schizophyllan, Biomacromol., vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 49-60.
- Linder et al. (2005) Hydrophobins: the protein-amphiphiles of filamentous fungi, FEMS Microbiol. Rev., vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 877-896.
- Reference (2012, updated), “Carbohydrates”, pp. 1-29.
- Wosten, et al., Interfacial self-assmbly of a hydrophobin into an amphipathic protein membrane mediates fungal attachment to hydrophobic surfaces, EMBO Journal, Jan. 1, 1994, 13, 5848-5854.
- Swern, Baileys Industrial Oil and Fat Products, John Wiley & Sons, Jan. 1, 1979, 1, 369.
- Scholtmeijer, et al., Fungal hydrophobins in medical and technical applications, Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, May 19, 2001, 56, 1-8.
- Arbuckle, Ice Cream, Avi Publishing, Jan. 1, 1972, 2nd Ed, 284.
- Wosten, et al., Hydrophobins the fungal coat unravelled, Biophysica Acta, May 29, 2000, 1469, 79-86.
- Talbot, Aerial Morphogenesis Enter the Chaplins, Current Biology, Sep. 16, 2003, 13, R696-R698.
- Murray, et al., Foam stability proteins and nanoparticles, Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Sc, Jan. 1, 2004, 9, 314-320.
- Eleves, Teadora Gliga, Eleves, Jun. 8, 2007, &, 1.
- Nakari-Setala, et al., Differential expression of the vegetative and spore-bound hydrophobins of Trichoderma reesei, Eur J. Biochem, May 26, 1997, 248, 415-423.
- Tchuenbou-Magaia, et al., Hydrophobris stabilised air-filled emulsions for the food industry, Food Hydrocolloids, Mar. 16, 2009; 23, 1877-1885.
- Hoi, Encyclopedia of Food Science & Technology, John Wiley & Sons, Jan. 1, 1992, 1, 204-210.
- Wessels, Hydrophobins Proteins that Change the Nature of the Fungal Surface, Advances in Microbial Physiology, Jan. 1, 1997, 38, No. 38, 1-45.
- Wosten, Hydrophobins Multipurpose Proteins, Annu Rev Microbiol, Jan. 1, 2001, 55, 625-646.
- Co-pending appln. Berry et al., U.S. appl. No. 11/168,209, filed Jun. 27, 2005.
- Co-pending appln. Aldred et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/168,214, filed Jun. 27, 2005.
- Co-pending appln. Bramley et al., U.S. Appl. No. 11/639,851, filed Dec. 15, 2006.
- Co-pending appln. Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/780,294, filed May 14, 2010.
- Co-pending appln. Cox et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/780,323, filed May 14, 2010.
- Dickinson, Dec. 2, 2010, Mixed biopolymers at interfaces: Competive adsorption and multilayer structures, Food Hydrocolloids, 25, 1966-1983.
- Fox, 1992, Analytical methods for Milk Proteins, Advanced Dairy Chemistry 1: Proteins, vol. 1, pp. 1, 6-7.
- Graham et al., Jul. 3, 1979, Proteins at Liquid Interfaces, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 70, 415-426.
- Miquelim et al., 2010, pH Influence on the stability of foams with protein-polysaccharide complexes at their interfaces, Food Hydrocolloids, 24, No. 4, 398-405.
- Patino and Pilosof, 2011, Protein-polysaccharide interactions at fluid interfaces, Food Hydrocolloids, 25, 1925-1937.
- Schmitt, Feb. 27, 2012, Declaration of Christophe Schmitt, Declaration of Christophe Schmitt, 1-4.
- Guinee et al., 2004, Salt in Cheese: Physical, Chemical and Biological Aspects, vol. 1, 3rd Ed., pp. 207-259.
- Guar Gum, Guargum biz, Jun. 14, 2010, p. 1.
- Penttila, et al., Molecular Biology of Trichoderma & Biotechnological Applications, Handbook of Fungal Biotech, Jan. 1, 2004, 2nd Ed. pp. 413-427.
- Talbot, 7 Fungal Hydrophobins, Howard & Gow, Jan. 1, 2001, vol. 7, pp. 145-159.
- Soukoulis, et al., Impact of the acidification process hydrocolloids & protein fortifiers on the physical & Sensory properties of frozen yogurt, Intl Journal of Dairy Tech, May 2, 2008, vol. 61, No. 2, pp. 170-177.
- Whitcomb, et al., Rheology of Guar Solutions, Journal of Applied Polymer Sc, Jan. 1, 1980, vol. 25, pp. 2815-2827.
- Quintas, et al., Rheology of superstaurated sucrose solutions, Journal of Food Engineering, Jan. 1, 2006, vol. 77, pp. 844-852.
- Van Der Werf, Green coatings healthy foods and drug targeting, Leads in Life Science, Jan. 1, 2000, vol. 5, p. 1.
- Russo, et al., Surface activity of the phytotoxin cerato-ulmin, Natl Research Council of Canada, Jan. 1, 1982, vol. 60, pp. 1414-1422.
- Search proteins matching the sequence pattern used for the hydrophobin definition in patent EP 1926 399 B1, Nestle Research Center, Oct. 16, 2009, pp. 1-3.
- Takai, et al., Cerato-ulmin, a wilting losin of ceratocystis ulmi: isolation & some properties of cerato-ulmin from the culture of C. ulmi, Phytopath, Jan. 1, 1978, vol. 91, pp. 129-146.
- Wosten, et al., Interfacial self-assembly of a fungal hydrophobin to a hydrophobic rodlet layer, Plant Cell, Nov. 1, 1993, vol. 5, pp. 1567-1574.
- Stringer, et al., Cerato-ulmin a toxin involved in dutch elm disease is a fungal hydrophobin, Plant Cell, Feb. 1, 1993, *, pp. 145-146.
- Fats Oils Fatty Acids Triglycerides, Scientific Psychic, Jan. 1, 2005, pp. 1-4.
- Wessels, et al., Fungal hydrophobins proteins that function at an interface, Trends in Plant Science, Jan. 1, 1996, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 9-15.
- Sienkiewicz, Whey and Whey Utiliztion, Verlag Th Mann, Jan. 1, 1990, 2nd Ed, pp. 82-33.
- Arbuckle, Ice Cream, Ice Cream 2nd Ed 1972 pp. 35 266 284-285, Jan. 1, 1972, 2nd Edition, pp. 35, 266, 284-285.
- Arbuckle, Ice Cream, Ice Cream, 1972, 2nd, p. 31.
- Arbuckle, Ice Cream, Ice Cream, 1972, 2nd Ed., p. 265, Avi Publishing Company.
- Sanderson, Applications of Xanthan Gum, British Polymer Jr., 1981, vol. 13, pp. 71-75.
- Temple, Biological Roles for cerato-Ulmin, a Hydrophobin secreted by the elm pathogens, Opthiostoma ulmi and O. novo-ulmi, Micological Society of America, 2000, vol. 92, pp. 1-9.
- European Search Report Application No. EP 08171868, dated May 18, 2009.
- International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/EP2009/066258, mailed Mar. 4, 2010.
- Written Opinion, International Application No. PCT/EP2009/066258.
- Arbuckle, 1972, Ice Cream, Ice Cream, 2nd Edition, pp. 15, 18, 35, 61, 65.
- Co-Pending application Hedges et al., U.S. Appl. No. 12/636,157, filed Dec. 11, 2009.
- Fox, et al., Jan. 1, 2004, Cheese: Physical, Chemical and Biological Aspects, Cheese Chemistry, Physics & Microbiology, 3rd, vol. 1, 207-223 9 (Best Available Copy).
Type: Grant
Filed: Jul 30, 2013
Date of Patent: Mar 18, 2014
Assignee: Conopco, Inc. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ)
Inventor: Nicholas David Hedges (Sharnbrook)
Primary Examiner: Manjunath Rao
Assistant Examiner: Samuel Liu
Application Number: 13/954,091
International Classification: C07K 1/14 (20060101); A61K 31/731 (20060101); A61K 38/00 (20060101);