Search
2023 Volume 3
Article Contents
REVIEW   Open Access    

Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability

More Information
  • Proteases are among the most important classes of hydrolytic enzymes and occupy a key position due to their applicability in both physiological and commercial fields. They are essential constituents of all forms of life, including plants, animals, and microorganisms. However, microorganisms represent an attractive source for protease secretion due to their high productivity in a relatively short time and limited space requirements for cultivation, amongst others. Microbial proteases are produced by submerged or solid-state fermentation process during post-exponential or stationary growth phase. The production of these biocatalysts by microbes is influenced by nutritional and physicochemical parameters. Downstream recovery of high-value enzyme products from culture supernatant using suitable techniques is imperative prior to further use of the biocatalysts. Immobilization of these enzymes in appropriate matrices permits reusability, reclamation, enhanced stability and cost-effectiveness of the biocatalysts. The catalytic properties of microbial proteases help in the discovery of enzymes with high activity and stability, over extreme temperatures and pH for utilization in large-scale bioprocesses. This review provides insights into microbial proteases taking cognizance of the bioprocess parameters influencing microbial proteases production coupled with methods employed for protease purification as well as the immobilization and biochemical properties of the biocatalysts for potential biotechnological applications.
  • 加载中
  • [1]

    Adetunji AI, Olaniran AO. 2021. Production strategies and biotechnological relevance of microbial lipases: a review. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 52:1257−69

    doi: 10.1007/s42770-021-00503-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2]

    Gurung N, Ray S, Bose S, Rai V. 2013. A broader view: microbial enzymes and their relevance in industries medicine and beyond. Biomed Research International 2013:329121

    doi: 10.1155/2013/329121

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3]

    Adetunji AI, Olaniran AO. 2023. Biocatalytic profiling of free and immobilized partially purified alkaline protease from an autochthonous Bacillus aryabhattai Ab15-ES. Reactions 4:231−45

    doi: 10.3390/reactions4020013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4]

    Singh R, Kumar M, Mittal A, Mehta PK. 2016. Microbial enzymes: industrial progress in 21st century. 3 Biotech 6:174

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-016-0485-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5]

    Prakash D, Nawani N, Prakash M, Bodas M, Mandal A, et al. 2013. Actinomycetes: a repertory of green catalysts with a potential revenue resource. BioMed Research International 2013:264020

    doi: 10.1155/2013/264020

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6]

    Kieliszek M, Pobiega K, Piwowarek K, Kot AM. 2021. Characteristics of the proteolytic enzymes produced by lactic acid bacteria. Molecules 26(7):1858

    doi: 10.3390/molecules26071858

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7]

    Shankar S, Rao M, Laxman RS. 2011. Purification and characterization of an alkaline protease by a new strain of Beauveria sp. Process Biochemistry 46:579−85

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2010.10.013

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8]

    Ibrahim ASS, Al-Salamah AA, El-Badawi YB, El-Tayeb MA, Antranikian G. 2015. Detergent-, solvent- and salt-compatible thermoactive alkaline serine protease from halotolerant alkaliphilic Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15: purification and characterization. Extremophiles 19:961−71

    doi: 10.1007/s00792-015-0771-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9]

    Singh S, Bajaj BK. 2017. Potential application spectrum of microbial proteases for clean and green industrial production. Energy Ecology and Environment 2:370−86

    doi: 10.1007/s40974-017-0076-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10]

    Matkawala F, Nighojkar S, Kumar A, Nighojkar A. 2021. Microbial alkaline serine proteases: production, properties and applications. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 37:63

    doi: 10.1007/s11274-021-03036-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Singhal P, Nigam VK, Vidyarthi AS. 2012. Studies on production, characterization and applications of microbial alkaline proteases. International Journal Advanced Biotechnology and Research 3:653−69

    Google Scholar

    [12]

    Sawant R, Nagendran S. 2014. Protease: an enzyme with multiple industrial applications. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences 3:568−79

    Google Scholar

    [13]

    De Souza PM, Bittencourt MLA, Caprara CC, de Freitas M, de Almeida RPC, et al. 2015. A biotechnology perspective of fungal proteases. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 46:337−46

    doi: 10.1590/S1517-838246220140359

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14]

    Goda DA, Bassiouny AR, Abdel Monem NM, Soliman NA, Abdel Fattah YR. 2020. Effective multi-functional biotechnological applications of protease/keratinase enzyme produced by new Egyptian isolate (Laceyella sacchari YNDH). Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 18:23

    doi: 10.1186/s43141-020-00037-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15]

    Milošević J, Vrhovac L, Đurković F, Janković B, Malkov S, et al. 2020. Isolation, identification, and stability of ficin 1c isoform from fig latex. New Journal of Chemistry 44:15716−23

    doi: 10.1039/d0nj02938f

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16]

    Romero-Garay MG, Martínez-Montaño E, Hernández-Mendoza A, Vallejo-Cordoba B, González-Córdova AF, et al. 2020. Bromelia karatas and Bromelia pinguin: sources of plant proteases used for obtaining antioxidant hydrolysates from chicken and fish by-products. Applied Biological Chemistry 63:41

    doi: 10.1186/s13765-020-00525-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17]

    Shouket HA, Ameen I, Tursunov O, Kholikova K, Pirimov O, et al. 2020. Study on industrial applications of papain: a succinct review. IOP Conference Series: Earth Environmental Science 614:012171

    doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/614/1/012171

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18]

    Van der Hoorn RAL, Klemenčič M. 2021. Plant proteases: from molecular mechanisms to functions in development and immunity. Journal of Experimental Botany 72(9):3337−39

    doi: 10.1093/jxb/erab129

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19]

    Rao MB, Tanksale AM, Ghatge MS, Deshpande VV. 1998. Molecular and biotechnological aspects of microbial proteases. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 62:597−635

    doi: 10.1128/MMBR.62.3.597-635.1998

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20]

    González-Rábade N, Badillo-Corona JA, Aranda-Barradas JS, Oliver-Salvador MDC. 2011. Production of plant proteases in vivo and in vitro- a review. Biotechnology Advances 29:983−96

    doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.08.017

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Singh S, Singh A, Kumar S, Mittal P, Singh IK. 2020. Protease inhibitors: recent advancement in its usage as a potential biocontrol agent for insect pest management. Insect Science 27(2):186−201

    doi: 10.1111/1744-7917.12641

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22]

    Fu Z, Akula S, Thorpe M, Hellman L. 2021. Marked difference in efficiency of the digestive enzymes pepsin, trypsin, chymotrypsin, and pancreatic elastase to cleave tightly folded proteins. Biological Chemistry 402(7):861−67

    doi: 10.1515/hsz-2020-0386

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23]

    EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP), Silano V, Baviera JMB, Bolognesi C, et al. 2021. Safety evaluation of a food enzyme containing trypsin and chymotrypsin from porcine pancreas. EFSA Journal 19(1):e06369

    doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6369

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24]

    Gupta R, Beg QK, Lorenz P. 2002. Bacterial alkaline proteases: molecular approaches and industrial applications. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 59:15−32

    doi: 10.1007/s00253-002-0975-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25]

    Haddar A, Bougatef A, Agrebi R, Sellami-Kamoun A, Nasri M. 2009. A novel surfactant-stable alkaline serine-protease from a newly isolated Bacillus mojavensis A21: purification and characterization. Process Biochemistry 44:29−35

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2008.09.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26]

    Raval VH, Pillai S, Rawal CM, Singh SP. 2014. Biochemical and structural characterization of a detergent-stable serine alkaline protease from seawater haloalkaliphilic bacteria. Process Biochemistry 49:955−962

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2014.03.014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27]

    Kumar CG, Takagi H. 1999. Microbial alkaline proteases: from a bioindustrial viewpoint. Biotechnology Advances 17:561−594

    doi: 10.1016/S0734-9750(99)00027-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28]

    Jisha VN, Smitha RB, Pradeep S, Sreedevi S, Unni KN, et al. 2013. Versatility of microbial proteases. Advances in Enzyme Research 1:39−51

    doi: 10.4236/aer.2013.13005

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29]

    Rieger TJ, de Oliveira CT, Pereira JQ, Brandelli PA, Daroit DJ. 2017. Proteolytic system of Bacillus sp. CL18 is capable of extensive feather degradation and hydrolysis of diverse protein substrates. British Poultry Science 58:329−35

    doi: 10.1080/00071668.2017.1293229

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30]

    Adetunji AI, Olaniran AO. 2020. Statistical modelling and optimization of protease production by an autochthonous Bacillus aryabhattai Ab15-ES: a response surface methodology approach. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 24:101528

    doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2020.101528

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31]

    Karray A, Alonazi M, Horchani H, Ben Bacha A. 2021. A novel thermostable and alkaline protease produced from Bacillus stearothermophilus isolated from olive oil mill sols suitable to industrial biotechnology. Molecules 26:1139

    doi: 10.3390/molecules26041139

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32]

    Mushtaq H, Jehangir A, Ganai SA, Farooq S, Ganai BA, et al. 2021. Biochemical characterization and functional analysis of heat stable high potential protease of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain HM48 from soils of Dachigam national park in Kashmir Himalaya. Biomolecules 11:117

    doi: 10.3390/biom11010117

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33]

    Thebti W, Riahi Y, Belhadj O. 2016. Purification and characterization of a new thermostable, haloalkaline, solvent stable, and detergent compatible serine protease from Geobacillus toebii strain LBT 77. Biomed Research International 2016:9178962

    doi: 10.1155/2016/9178962

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34]

    Zhang S, Li H, Uluko H, Liu L, Pang X, et al. 2015. Investigation of protease production by Pseudomonas fluorescens BJ-10 and degradation on milk proteins. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation 39:2466−72

    doi: 10.1111/jfpp.12496

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35]

    Silva GMM, Bezerra RP, Teixeira JA, Porto TS, Lima-Filho JL, et al. 2015. Fibrinolytic protease production by new Streptomyces sp. DPUA 1576 from Amazon lichens. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 18:16−19

    doi: 10.1016/j.ejbt.2014.11.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36]

    Mizuno T, Nanko A, Maehara Y, Shinoda S, Miyoshi SI. 2014. A novel extracellular protease of Vibrio mimicus that mediates maturation of an endogenous hemolysin. Microbiology and Immunology 58:503−12

    doi: 10.1111/1348-0421.12177

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37]

    Beganović J, Kos B, Pavunc AL, Uroić K, Džidara P, et al. 2013. Proteolytic activity of probiotic strain Lactobacillus helveticus M92. Anaerobe 20:58−64

    doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2013.02.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38]

    Lü J, Wu X, Jiang Y, Cai X, Huang L, et al. 2014. An extremophile Microbacterium strain and its protease production under alkaline conditions. Journal of Basic Microbiology 54:378−85

    doi: 10.1002/jobm.201200553

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [39]

    Bhargavi PL, Prakasham RS. 2016. Enhanced fibrinolytic protease production by Serratia marcescens RSPB11 through Plackett-Burman and response surface methodological approaches. Journal of Applied Biology and Biotechnology 4:6−14

    doi: 10.7324/jabb.2016.40302

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40]

    Shumi W, Hossain MDT, Anwar MN. 2004. Production of protease from Listeria monocytogenes. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 6:1097−100

    Google Scholar

    [41]

    Rattray FP, Bockelmann W, Fox PF. 1995. Purification and characterization of an extracellular proteinase from Brevibacterium linens ATCC 9174. Applied Environmental Microbiology 61:3454−56

    doi: 10.1128/aem.61.9.3454-3456.1995

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42]

    Yeo IO, Choi SH, Lee JS, Kim CJ. 1995. Characteristics of an alkaline protease from Alteromonas sp. Agricultural Chemistry and Biotechnology 38:106−10

    Google Scholar

    [43]

    Santos AF, Valle RS, Pacheco CA, Alvarez VM, Seldin L, et al. 2013. Extracellular proteases of Halobacillus blutaparonensis strain M9, a new moderately halophilic bacterium. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 44:1299−304

    doi: 10.1590/S1517-83822014005000015

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44]

    Vandecandelaere I, Depuydt P, Nelis HJ, Coenye T. 2014. Protease production by Staphylococcus epidermidis and its effect on Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Pathogens and Disease 70:321−31

    doi: 10.1111/2049-632X.12133

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45]

    Secades P, Guijarro JA. 1999. Purification and characterization of an extracellular protease from the fish pathogen Yersinia ruckeri and effect of culture conditions on production. Applied Environmental Microbiology 65:3969−75

    doi: 10.1128/AEM.65.9.3969-3975.1999

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46]

    Chang C, Gong S, Liu Z, Yan Q, Jiang Z. 2021. High level expression and biochemical characterization of an alkaline serine protease from Geobacillus stearothermophilus to prepare antihypertensive whey protein hydrolysate. BMC Biotechnology 21:21

    doi: 10.1186/s12896-021-00678-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47]

    Saba I, Qazi PH, Rather SA, Dar RA, Qadri QA, et al. 2012. Purification and characterization of a cold active alkaline protease from Stenotrophomonas sp., isolated from Kashmir, India. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 28:1071−79

    doi: 10.1007/s11274-011-0905-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48]

    Manni L, Misbah A, Zouine N, Ananou S. 2020. Biochemical characterization of a novel alkaline and detergent stable protease from Aeromonas veronii OB3. Microbiology and Biotechnology Letters 48(3):358−65

    doi: 10.4014/mbl.1912.12015

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49]

    Chandrasekaran M, Sathiyabama M. 2014. Production, partial purification and characterization of protease from a phytopathogenic fungi Alternaria solani (Ell. and Mart.) Sorauer. Journal of Basic Microbiology 54:763−74

    doi: 10.1002/jobm.201200584

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50]

    Lanka S, Anjali CH, Pydipalli M. 2017. Enhanced production of alkaline protease by Aspergillus niger DEF 1 isolated from dairy form effluent and determination of its fibrinolytic ability. African Journal of Microbiological Research 11:440−49

    doi: 10.5897/AJMR2016-8379

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51]

    Benluvankar V, Jebapriya GR, Gnanadoss JJ. 2015. Protease production by Penicillium sp. LCJ228 under solid state fermentation using groundnut oilcake as substrate. International Journal of Life Science and Pharma Research 5:2250−480

    Google Scholar

    [52]

    Al-Askar AA, AbdulKhair WM, Rashad YM. 2014. Production, purification and optimization of protease by Fusarium solani under solid fermentation and isolation of protease inhibitor protein from Rumex vesicarius L. Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology 8:239−50

    Google Scholar

    [53]

    Liu N, Huang L. 2015. Partial characterization of an acidic protease from Rhizopus stolonifer RN-11. Open Biotechnology Journal 9:199−203

    doi: 10.2174/1874070701509010199

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54]

    Shivasharanappa K, Hanchinalmath JV, Sundeep YS, Borah D, Talluri VSSLP. 2014. Optimization and production of alkaline proteases from agro byproducts using a novel Trichoderma viridiae strain VPG 12, isolated from agro soil. International Letters of Natural Sciences 9:78−84

    doi: 10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilns.14.77

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55]

    Alves MH, de Campos-Takaki GM, Okada K, Pessoa IHF, Milanez AI. 2005. Detection of extracellular protease in Mucor species. Revista Iberoamericana de Micologia 22:114−17

    doi: 10.1016/S1130-1406(05)70020-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [56]

    de Oliveira JM, Fernandes P, Benevides RG, de Assis SA. 2020. Characterization and immobilization of protease secreted by the fungus Moorella speciosa. 3 Biotech 10:419

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-020-02412-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57]

    Tsuchiya K, Arai T, Seki K, Kimura T. 1987. Purification and some properties of alkaline proteinases from Cephalosporium sp. KSM388. Agriculture and Biological Chemistry 51:2959−65

    doi: 10.1271/bbb1961.51.2959

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [58]

    Schlander M, Distler U, Tenzer S, Thines E, Claus H. 2017. Purification and properties of yeast proteases secreted by Wickerhamomyces anomalus 227 and Metschnikovia pulcherrima 446 during growth in a white grape juice. Fermentation 3:2

    doi: 10.3390/fermentation3010002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [59]

    Matoba S, Morano KA, Klionsky DJ, Kim K, Ogrydziak DM. 1997. Dipeptidyl aminopeptidase processing and biosynthesis of alkaline extracellular protease from Yarrowia lipolytica. Microbiology 143:3263−72

    doi: 10.1099/00221287-143-10-3263

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60]

    Hesham AEL, Alrumman SA, Al-Dayel MA, Salah HA. 2017. Screening and genetic identification of acidic and neutral protease-producing yeasts strains by 26S rRNA gene sequencing. Cytology and Genetics 51:221−29

    doi: 10.3103/s0095452717030033

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [61]

    Razzaq A, Shamsi S, Ali A, Ali Q, Sajjad M, et al. 2019. Microbial proteases applications. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 7:110

    doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00110

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62]

    Vijayalakshmi S, Venkat KS, Thankamani V. 2011. Optimization and cultural characterization of Bacillus RV. B2.90 producing alkalophilic thermophilic protease. Research Journal of Biotechnology 6:26−32

    Google Scholar

    [63]

    Barett AJ. 1994. Proteolytic enzymes: serine and cysteine peptidases.Methods in Enzymology. vol. 244. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 765 pp. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0076-6879(00)x0290-x

    [64]

    Li Q, Yi L, Marek P, Iverson BL. 2013. Commercial proteases: present and future. FEBS Letters 587:1155−63

    doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2012.12.019

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65]

    Lundqvist H, Dahlgren C. 1995. The serine protease inhibitor diisopropylfluorophosphate inhibits neutrophil NADPH-oxidase activity induced by calcium ionophore ionomycin and serum opsonised yeast particles. Inflammation Research 44:510−517

    doi: 10.1007/BF01757354

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66]

    Barzkar N, Khan Z, Tamadoni Jahromi S, Pourmozaffar S, Gozari M, et al. 2021. A critical review on marine serine protease and its inhibitors: a new wave of drugs? International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 170:674−87

    doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.12.134

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67]

    Ellaiah P, Srinivasulu B, Adinarayana K. 2002. A review on microbial alkaline proteases. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 61:690−704

    Google Scholar

    [68]

    Raveendran S, Parameswaran B, Ummalyma SB, Abraham A, Mathew AK, et al. 2018. Applications of microbial enzymes in food industry. Food Technology and Biotechnology 56:16−30

    doi: 10.17113/ftb.56.01.18.5491

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69]

    Singh R, Mittal A, Kumar M, Mehta PK. 2016. Microbial proteases in commercial applications. Journal of Pharmaceutical, Chemical and Biological Sciences 4:365−74

    Google Scholar

    [70]

    Solanki P, Putatunda C, Kumar A, Bhatia R, Walia A. 2021. Microbial proteases: ubiquitous enzymes with innumerable uses. 3 Biotech 11:428

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-021-02928-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [71]

    Sundus H, Mukhtar H, Nawaz A. 2016. Industrial applications and production sources of serine alkaline proteases: a review. Journal of Bacteriology and Mycology 3:191−94

    Google Scholar

    [72]

    Barzkar N. 2020. Marine microbial alkaline protease: an efficient and essential tool for various industrial applications. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 161:1216−29

    doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.06.072

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [73]

    Hailemichael F. 2021. Production and industrial application of microbial aspartic protease: a review. International Journal of Food Engineering and Technology 5:85−90

    doi: 10.11648/j.ijfet.20210502.17

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [74]

    Vachher M, Sen A, Kapila R, Nigam A. 2021. Microbial therapeutic enzymes: a promising area of biopharmaceuticals. Current Research in Biotechnology 3:195−208

    doi: 10.1016/j.crbiot.2021.05.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [75]

    Mamo J, Assefa F. 2018. The role of microbial aspartic protease enzyme in food and beverage industries. Journal of Food Quality 2018:7957269

    doi: 10.1155/2018/7957269

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [76]

    Srilakshmi J, Madhavi J, Lavanya S. Ammani K. 2015. Commercial potential of fungal protease: past, present and future prospects. Journal of Pharmaceutical, Chemical and Biological Sciences 2:218−34

    Google Scholar

    [77]

    Mukherjee AK, Adhikari H, Rai SK. 2008. Production of alkaline protease by a thermophilic Bacillus subtilis under solid-state fermentation (SSF) condition using Imperata cylindrica grass and potato peel as low-cost medium: characterization and application of enzyme in detergent formulation. Biochemical Engineering Journal 39:353−61

    doi: 10.1016/j.bej.2007.09.017

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [78]

    Reddy LVA, Wee YJ, Yun JS, Ryu HW. 2008. Optimization of alkaline protease production by batch culture of Bacillus sp. RKY3 through Plackett-Burman and response surface methodological approaches. Bioresource Technology 99:2242−49

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2007.05.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [79]

    Usman A, Mohammed S, Mamo J. 2021. Production, optimization, and characterization of an acid protease from filamentous fungus by solid-state fermentation. International Journal of Microbiology 2021:1−12

    doi: 10.1155/2021/6685963

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [80]

    Beg QK, Saxena RK, Gupta R. 2002. De-repression and subsequent induction of protease synthesis by Bacillus mojavensis under fed-batch operations. Process Biochemistry 37:1103−9

    doi: 10.1016/S0032-9592(01)00320-X

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [81]

    Anandan D, Marmer WN, Dudley RL. 2007. Isolation, characterization and optimization of culture parameters for production of an alkaline protease isolated from Aspergillus tamari. Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology 34:339−47

    doi: 10.1007/s10295-006-0201-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [82]

    Bhunia B, Basak B, Dey A. 2012. A review on production of serine alkaline protease by Bacillus spp. Journal of Biochemical Technology 3:448−57

    Google Scholar

    [83]

    Navanneth S, Bhuvanesh S, Bhaskar V, Vijay KP, Kandaswamy SKJ, et al. 2009. Optimization of medium for the production of subtilisin from Bacillus subtilis MTCC 441. African Journal of Biotechnology 8:6327−31

    doi: 10.5897/AJB2009.000-9480

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [84]

    Queiroga AC, Pintado ME, Malcata FX. 2012. Use of response surface methodology to optimize protease synthesis by a novel strain of Bacillus sp. isolated from Portuguese sheep wool. Journal of Applied Microbiology 113:36−43

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05300.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [85]

    Sharma KM, Kumar R, Vats S, Gupta A. 2014. Production, partial purification and characterization of alkaline protease from Bacillus arybhattai K3. International Journal of advanced Pharmaceutical and Biological Chemistry 3:290−98

    Google Scholar

    [86]

    Sharma A, Sharma V, Saxena J, Yadav B, Alam A, et al. 2015. Optimization of protease production from bacteria isolated from soil. Applied Research Journal 1:388−394

    Google Scholar

    [87]

    Sathish Kumar R, Ananthan G, Selva Prabhu A. 2014. Optimization of medium composition for alkaline protease production by Marinobacter sp. GA CAS9 using response surface methodology - A statistical approach. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 3:191−97

    doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2013.11.005

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [88]

    Badhe P, Joshi M, Adivarekar R. 2016. Optimized production of extracellular proteases by Bacillus subtilis from degraded abattoir waste. Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology 5:29−36

    Google Scholar

    [89]

    Akcan N. 2012. Production of extracellular protease in submerged fermentation by Bacillus licheniformis ATCC 12759. African Journal of Biotechnology 11:1729−35

    doi: 10.5897/ajb11.2183

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [90]

    Puri S, Beg QK, Gupta R. 2002. Optimization of alkaline protease production from Bacillus sp. by response surface methodology. Current Microbiology 44:286−90

    doi: 10.1007/s00284-001-0006-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [91]

    Srividya S, Mala M. 2011. Influence of process parameters on the production of detergent compatible alkaline protease by a newly isolated Bacillus sp. Y. Turkish Journal of Biology 35:177−82

    doi: 10.3906/biy-0906-47

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [92]

    Pathak AP, Deshmukh KB. 2012. Alkaline protease production, extraction and characterization from alkaliphilic Bacillus licheniformis KBDL4: a lonar soda lake isolate. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 50:569−76

    Google Scholar

    [93]

    Gouda MK. 2006. Optimization and purification of alkaline proteases produced by marine Bacillus sp. MIG newly isolated from eastern harbour of Alexandria. Polish Journal of Microbiology 55:119−26

    Google Scholar

    [94]

    Singh SK, Tripathi VR, Jain RK, Vikram S, Garg SK. 2010. An antibiotic, heavy metal resistant and halotolerant Bacillus cereus SIU1 and its thermoalkaline protease. Microbial Cell Factories 9:59

    doi: 10.1186/1475-2859-9-59

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [95]

    Nisha NS, Divakaran J. 2014. Optimization of alkaline protease production from Bacillus subtilis NS isolated from sea water. African Journal of Biotechnology 13:1707−13

    doi: 10.5897/AJB2014.13652

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [96]

    Jothiprakasam V, Sambantham M, Chinnathambi S. 2014. Optimization of alkaline protease production and its fibrinolytic activity from the bacterium Pseudomonas fluorescens isolated from fish waste discharged soil. African Journal of Biotechnology 13:3052−60

    doi: 10.5897/AJB2014.13863

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [97]

    Jaswal RK, Kocher GS, Virk MS. 2008. Production of alkaline protease by Bacillus circulans using agricultural residues: A statistical approach. Indian Journal of Biotechnology 7:356−60

    Google Scholar

    [98]

    Khosravi-Darani K, Falahatpishe HR, Jalali M. 2008. Alkaline protease production on date waste by an alkalophilic Bacillus sp. 2-5 isolated from soil. African Journal of Biotechnology 7:1536−42

    Google Scholar

    [99]

    Lakshmi BKM, Hemalatha KPJ. 2014. Response surface optimization of medium composition for alkaline protease production by Bacillus cereus strain S8. International Journal of Pure Applied Bioscience 3:216−23

    Google Scholar

    [100]

    Ibrahim ASS, Al-Salamah AA, Elbadawi YB, El-Tayeb MA, Ibrahim SSS. 2015. Production of extracellular alkaline protease by new halotolerant alkaliphilic Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15 isolated from hyper saline soda lakes. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 18:236−43

    doi: 10.1016/j.ejbt.2015.04.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [101]

    Zambare V, Nilegaonkar S, Kanekar P. 2011. A novel extracellular protease from Pseudomonas aeruginosa MCM B-327: enzyme production and its partial characterization. New Biotechnology 28:173−81

    doi: 10.1016/j.nbt.2010.10.002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [102]

    Ravishankar K, Kumar MA, Saravanan K. 2012. Isolation of alkaline protease from Bacillus subtilis AKRS3. African Journal of Biotechnology 11:13415−27

    doi: 10.5897/ajb12.404

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [103]

    Maal KB, Emtiazi G, Nahvi I. 2009. Production of alkaline protease by Bacillus cereus and Bacillus polymyxa in new industrial culture medium and its immobilization. African Journal of Microbiological Research 3:491−97

    Google Scholar

    [104]

    Abusham RA, Rahman RNZR, Salleh AB, Basri M. 2009. Optimization of physical factors affecting the production of thermo-stable organic solvent-tolerant protease from a newly isolated halo tolerant Bacillus subtilis strain Rand. Microbial Cell Factories 8:20

    doi: 10.1186/1475-2859-8-20

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [105]

    Bezerra VHS, Cardoso SL, Fonseca-Bazzo Y, Silveira D, Magalhães PO, et al. 2021. Protease produced by endophytic fungi: a systematic review. Molecules 26:7062

    doi: 10.3390/molecules26227062

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [106]

    Sepahy AA, Jabalameli L. 2011. Effect of culture conditions on the production of an extracellular protease by Bacillus sp. isolated from soil sample of Lavizan jungle park. Enzyme Research 2011:219628

    doi: 10.4061/2011/219628

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [107]

    Hammami A, Bayoudh A, Abdelhedi O, Nasri M. 2018. Low-cost culture medium for the production of proteases by Bacillus mojavensis SA and their potential use for the preparation of antioxidant protein hydrolysate from meat sausage by-products. Annals of Microbiology 68:473−84

    doi: 10.1007/s13213-018-1352-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [108]

    Elgammal EW, El-Khonezy MI, Ahmed EF, Abd-Elaziz AM. 2020. Enhanced production, partial purification, and characterization of alkaline thermophilic protease from the endophytic fungus Aspergillus ochraceus BT21. Egyptian Pharmaceutical Journal 19:338−49

    doi: 10.4103/epj.epj_31_20

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [109]

    Suleiman AD, Abdul Rahman N, Yusof HM, Shariff FM, Yasid NA. 2020. Effect of cultural conditions on protease production by a thermophilic Geobacillus thermoglucosidasius SKF4 isolated from Sungai Klah hot spring park. Malaysia. Molecules 25:2609

    doi: 10.3390/molecules25112609

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [110]

    Sellami-Kamoun A, Ghorbel-Frikha B, Haddar A, Nasri M. 2011. Enhanced Bacillus cereus BG1 protease production by the use of sardinelle (Sardinella aurita) powder. Annals of Microbiology 61:273−80

    doi: 10.1007/s13213-010-0134-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [111]

    Gomri MA, Rico-Díaz A, Escuder-Rodríguez JJ, El Moulouk Khaldi T, González-Siso MI, et al. 2018. Production and characterization of an extracellular acid protease from thermophilic Brevibacillus sp. OA30 isolated from an Algerian hot spring. Microorganisms 6:31

    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms6020031

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [112]

    Chittoor JT, Balaji L, Jayaraman G. 2016. Optimization of parameters that affect the activity of the alkaline protease from halotolerant bacterium, Bacillus acquimaris VITP4, by the application of response surface methodology and evaluation of the storage stability of the enzyme. Iranian Journal of Biotechnology 14:23−32

    Google Scholar

    [113]

    Mienda BS, Yahya A. 2011. Engineering of microbial proteases: improving stability and catalytic performances. IIOAB Journal 2:10−15

    Google Scholar

    [114]

    Rigo E, Rigoni RE, Lodea P, de Oliveira D, Freire DMG, et al. 2008. Application of different lipases as pretreatment in anaerobic treatment of wastewater. Environmental Engineering Science 25:1243−48

    doi: 10.1089/ees.2007.0197

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [115]

    Mugdha A, Usha M. 2012. Enzymatic treatment of wastewater containing dyestuffs using different delivery systems. Scientific Reviews and Chemical Communications 2:31−40

    Google Scholar

    [116]

    Sullivan TGO, Epstein AC, Korchin SR, Beaton NC. 1984. Applications of ultrafiltration in biotechnology. Chemical Engineering Progress 80:68−75

    Google Scholar

    [117]

    Ratnaningsih E, Reynard R, Khoiruddin K, Wenten IG, Boopathy R. 2021. Recent advancements of UF-based separation for selective enrichment of proteins and bioactive peptides-a review. Applied Sciences 11:1078

    doi: 10.3390/app11031078

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [118]

    Valério R, Crespo JG, Galinha CF, Brazinha C. 2021. Effect of ultrafiltration operating conditions for separation of ferulic acid from arabinoxylans in corn fibre alkaline extract. Sustainability 13:4682

    doi: 10.3390/su13094682

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [119]

    Bell DJ, Hoare M, Dunnill P. 1983. The formation of protein precipitates and their centrifugal recovery. In Downstream Processing. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology. Vol 26. Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin. pp. 1−72. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0001860

    [120]

    Muthulakshmi C, Gomathi D, Kumar DG, Ravikumar G, Kalaiselvi M, et al. 2011. Production, purification and characterization of protease by Aspergillus flavus under solid state fermentation. Jordan of Biological Sciences 4:137−48

    Google Scholar

    [121]

    Prabhavathy G, Rajasekara Pandian M, Senthikumar B. 2013. Identification of industrially important alkaline protease producing Bacillus subtilis by 16s rRNA sequence analysis and its applications. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Sciences 4:332−38

    Google Scholar

    [122]

    Iqbalsyah TM, Atikah M, Febriani F. 2019. Purification and partial characterization of a thermo-halostable protease produced by Geobacillus sp. strain PLS A isolated from undersea fumaroles. Journal of Taibah University Science 13(1):850−57

    doi: 10.1080/16583655.2019.1650489

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [123]

    Hussain S, Rehman Au, Luckett DJ, Naqvi SMS, Blanchard CL. 2021. Protease inhibitors purified from the canola meal extracts of two genetically diverse genotypes exhibit antidiabetic and antihypertension properties. Molecules 26:2078

    doi: 10.3390/molecules26072078

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [124]

    Boxi A, Parikh I, Radhika BS, Shryli KS. 2020. Current trends in protein purification: a review. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology 7(6):279−310

    doi: 10.32628/ijsrst207645

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [125]

    Lalli E, Silva JS, Boi C, Sarti GC. 2020. Affinity membranes and monoliths for protein purification. Membranes 10:1

    doi: 10.3390/membranes10010001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [126]

    Mahmoodi S, Pourhassan-Moghaddam M, Wood DW, Majdi H, Zarghami N. 2019. Current affinity approaches for purification of recombinant proteins. Cogent Biology 5:1665406

    doi: 10.1080/23312025.2019.1665406

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [127]

    Matsuda Y, Leung M, Okuzumi T, Mendelsohn B. 2020. A purification strategy utilizing hydrophobic interaction chromatography to obtain homogeneous species from a site-specific antibody drug conjugate produced by AJICAPTM first generation. Antibodies 9:16

    doi: 10.3390/antib9020016

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [128]

    Osuna-Amarillas PS, Rouzaud-Sandez O, Higuera-Barraza OA, Arias-Moscoso JL, Lόpez-Mata MA, et al. 2019. Hydrophobic interaction chromatography as a separation method of alkaline protease from viscera of Scomberomorus sierra. TIP Revista Especializada en Cienc Químico-Biologicas 22:1−10

    doi: 10.22201/fesz.23958723e.2019.0.183

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [129]

    Pereira Bresolin IRA, Lingg N, Bresolin ITL, Jungbauer A. 2020. Hydrophobic interaction chromatography as polishing step enables obtaining ultra-pure recombinant antibodies. Journal of Biotechnology 324:100020

    doi: 10.1016/j.btecx.2020.100020

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [130]

    Mohamad NR, Marzuki NHC, Buang NA, Huyop F, Wahab RA. 2015. An overview of technologies for immobilization of enzymes and surface analysis techniques for immobilized enzymes. Biotechnology and Biotechnological Equipment 29:205−20

    doi: 10.1080/13102818.2015.1008192

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [131]

    Calzoni E, Cesaretti A, Tacchi S, Caponi S, Pellegrino RM, et al. 2021. Covalent immobilization of proteases on polylactic acid for proteins hydrolysis and waste biomass protein content valorization. Catalysts 11:167

    doi: 10.3390/catal11020167

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [132]

    Tischer W, Wedenkind F. 1999. Immobilized enzymes: methods and applications. In Biocatalysis - From Discovery to Application. Topics in Current Chemistry, ed. Fessner WD, Archelas A, Demirjian DC, et al. Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin. pp. 95−126. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-68116-7_4

    [133]

    Duman YA, Tekin N. 2020. Kinetic and thermodynamic properties of purified alkaline protease from Bacillus pumilus Y7 and non-covalent immobilization to poly(vinylimidazole)/clay hydrogel. Engineering in Life Sciences 20(1-2):36−49

    doi: 10.1002/elsc.201900119

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [134]

    Datta S, Rene CL, Rajaram YRS. 2013. Enzyme immobilization: an overview on techniques and support materials. 3 Biotech 3:1−9

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-012-0071-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [135]

    Adetunji AI, Olaniran AO. 2018. Immobilization and characterization of lipase from an indigenous Bacillus aryabhattai SE3-PB isolated from lipid-rich wastewater. Preparative Biochemistry and Biotechnology 48(10):898−905

    doi: 10.1080/10826068.2018.1514517

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [136]

    Kamal S, Hussain F, Bibi I, Azeem M, Ahmad T, et al. 2022. Mutagenesis and immobilization of chitB-protease for induced de-staining and goat skin dehairing potentialities. Catalysis Letters 152:12−27

    doi: 10.1007/s10562-021-03605-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [137]

    Asuri P, Karajanagi SS, Sellitto E, Kim DY, Kane RS, et al. 2006. Water-soluble carbon nanotube-enzyme conjugates as functional biocatalytic formulations. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 95:804−11

    doi: 10.1002/bit.21016

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [138]

    Sheldon RA. 2007. Cross-linked enzyme aggregates (CLEA®s): stable and recyclable biocatalysts. Biochemical Society 35:1583−87

    doi: 10.1042/BST0351583

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [139]

    Tian X, Anming W, Lifeng H, Haifeng L, Zhenming C, et al. 2009. Recent advance in the support and technology used in enzyme immobilization. African Journal of Biotechnology 8:4724−33

    Google Scholar

    [140]

    Hernandez K, Fernandez-Lafuente R. 2011. Control of protein immobilization: coupling immobilization and site-directed mutagenesis to improve biocatalyst or biosensor performance. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 48:107−22

    doi: 10.1016/j.enzmictec.2010.10.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [141]

    Saifuddin N, Raziah AZ, Junizah AR. 2013. carbon nanotubes: a review on structure and their interaction with proteins. Journal of Chemistry 2013:676815

    doi: 10.1155/2013/676815

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [142]

    Qamar SA, Asgher M, Bilal M. 2020. Immobilization of alkaline protease from Bacillus brevis using Ca-Alginate entrapment strategy for improved catalytic stability silver recovery, and dehairing potentialities. Catalysis Letters 150:3572−83

    doi: 10.1007/s10562-020-03268-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [143]

    Soleimani M, Khani A, Najafzadeh K. 2012. Biotechnology expanding horizonsa-amylase immobilization on the silica nanoparticles for cleaning performance towards starch soils in laundry detergents. Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic 74:1−5

    doi: 10.1016/j.molcatb.2011.07.011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [144]

    Mason RD, Detar CC, Weetall HH. 1975. Protease covalently coupled to porous glass: preparation and characterization. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 17(7):1019−27

    doi: 10.1002/bit.260170706

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [145]

    Khan AA, Akhtar S, Husain Q. 2006. Direct immobilization of polyphenol oxidases on celite 545 from ammonium sulphate fractionated proteins of potato (Solanum tuberosum). Journal of Molecular Catalysis B 40:58−63

    doi: 10.1016/j.molcatb.2006.03.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [146]

    Ansari SA, Husain Q. 2012. Lactose hydrolysis from milk/whey in batch and continuous processes by concanavalin A-celite 545 immobilized Aspergillus oryzae β-galactosidase. Food and Bioproducts Processing 90:351−359

    doi: 10.1016/j.fbp.2011.07.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [147]

    Wu C, Zhou G, Jiang X, Ma J, Zhang H, et al. 2012. Active biocatalysts based on Candida rugosa lipase immobilized in vesicular silica. Process Biochemistry 47:953−959

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2012.03.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [148]

    Gemenier P. 1992. Materials for enzyme engineering. In Enzyme Engineering, ed. Gemeiner P. 1st Edition. New York: Ellis Horwood. pp. 113−19

    [149]

    Brena BM, Viera BF. 2006. Immobilization of enzymes. In Immobilization of enzymes and cells, ed. : Guisan JM. 3rd Edition. New Jersey: Humana Press Inc. pp. 123−24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-550-7

    [150]

    Kim J, Grate JW, Wang P. 2006. Nanostructures for enzyme stabilization. Chemical and Engineering Science 61:1017−26

    doi: 10.1016/j.ces.2005.05.067

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [151]

    Lee CH, Lin TS, Mou CY. 2009. Mesoporous materials for encapsulating enzymes. Nanotoday 4:165−79

    doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2009.02.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [152]

    Huang XJ, Chen PC, Huang F, Ou Y, Chen MR, et al. 2011. Immobilization of Candida rugosa lipase on electrospun cellulose nanofiber membrane. Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic 70:95−100

    doi: 10.1016/j.molcatb.2011.02.010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [153]

    Geethanjali S, Subash A. 2013. Optimization and immobilization of purified Labeo rohita visceral protease by entrapment method. Enzyme Research 2013:874050

    doi: 10.1155/2013/874050

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [154]

    Park JM, Kim M, Park HS, Jang M, Min J, et al. 2013. Immobilization of lysozyme-CLEA onto electrospun chitosan nanofiber for effective antimicrobial applications. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 54:37−43

    doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2012.11.025

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [155]

    Sahin S, Ozmen I, Kir E. 2015. Purification, immobilization, and characterization of protease from local Bacillus subtilis M-11. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering 10:241−47

    doi: 10.1002/apj.1868

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [156]

    Guleria S, Walia A, Chauhan A, Shirkot CK. 2016. Immobilization of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SP1 and its alkaline protease in various matrices for effective hydrolysis of casein. 3 Biotech 6:208

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-016-0519-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [157]

    Ibrahim ASS, Al-Salamah AA, El-Toni AM, Almaary KS, El-Tayeb MA, et al. 2016. Enhancement of alkaline protease activity and stability via covalent immobilization onto hollow core-mesoporous shell silica nanospheres. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 17:184

    doi: 10.3390/ijms17020184

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [158]

    Silva CJSM, Zhang Q, Shen J, Cavaco-Paulo A. 2006. Immobilization of proteases with a water soluble-insoluble reversible polymer for treatment of wool. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 39:634−40

    doi: 10.1016/j.enzmictec.2005.11.016

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [159]

    Nandan A, Nampoothiri KM. 2020. Therapeutic and biotechnological applications of substrate specific microbial aminopeptidases. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 104:5243−57

    doi: 10.1007/s00253-020-10641-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [160]

    Sharma KM, Kumar R, Panwar S, Kumar A. 2017. Microbial alkaline proteases: optimization of production parameters and their properties. Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 15:115−26

    doi: 10.1016/j.jgeb.2017.02.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [161]

    Mothe T, Sultanpuram VR. 2016. Production, purification and characterization of a thermotolerant alkaline serine protease from a novel species Bacillus caseinilyticus. 3 Biotech 6:53

    doi: 10.1007/s13205-016-0377-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [162]

    Yilmaz B, Baltaci MO, Sisecioglu M, Adiguzel A. 2016. Thermotolerant alkaline protease enzyme from Bacillus licheniformis A10: purification, characterization, effects of surfactants and organic solvents. Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry 31:1241−47

    doi: 10.3109/14756366.2015.1118687

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [163]

    Nadeem M, Qazi JI, Syed Q, Gulsher M. 2013. Purification and characterization of an alkaline protease from Bacillus licheniformis UV-9 for detergent formulations. Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technology 35:187−95

    Google Scholar

    [164]

    Jayakumar R, Jayashree S, Annapurna B, Seshadri S. 2012. Characterization of thermostable serine alkaline protease from an alkaliphilic strain Bacillus pumilus MCAS8 and its applications. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 168:1849−66

    doi: 10.1007/s12010-012-9902-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [165]

    Patil U, Mokashe N, Chaudhari A. 2016. Detergent-compatible, organic solvent-tolerant alkaline protease from Bacillus circulans MTCC 7942: purification and characterization. Preparative Biochemistry and Biotechnology 46:56−64

    doi: 10.1080/10826068.2014.979205

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [166]

    Sari E, Loğoğlu E, Öktemer A. 2015. Purification and characterization of organic solvent stable serine alkaline protease from newly isolated Bacillus circulans M34. Biomedical Chromatography 29:1356−63

    doi: 10.1002/bmc.3431

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [167]

    Waghmare SR, Gurav AA, Mali SA, Nadaf NH, Jadhav DB, et al. 2015. Purification and characterization of novel organic solvent tolerant 98 kDa alkaline protease from isolated Stenotrophomonas maltophilia strain SK. Protein Expression and Purification 107:1−6

    doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2014.11.002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [168]

    Yildirim V, Baltaci MO, Ozgencli I, Sisecioglu M, Adiguzel A, et al. 2017. Purification and biochemical characterization of a novel thermostable serine alkaline protease from Aeribacillus pallidus C10: a potential additive for detergents. Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry 32:468−77

    doi: 10.1080/14756366.2016.1261131

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [169]

    Xin Y, Sun Z, Chen Q, Wang J, Wang Y, et al. 2015. Purification and characterization of a novel extracellular thermostable alkaline protease from Streptomyces sp. M30. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 25:1944−53

    doi: 10.4014/jmb.1507.07017

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [170]

    Firouzbakht H, Zibaee A, Hoda H, Sohani MM. 2015. Purification and characterization of the cuticle-degrading proteases produced by an isolate of Beauveria bassiana using the cuticle of the predatory bug, Andrallus spinidens Fabricius (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Journal of Plant Protection Research 55(2):179−86

    doi: 10.1515/jppr-2015-0024

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [171]

    Adinarayana K, Ellaiah P, Prasad DS. 2003. Purification and partial characterization of thermostable serine alkaline protease from a newly isolated Bacillus subtilis PE-11. AAPS PharmSciTech 4:56

    doi: 10.1208/pt040456

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [172]

    Jaouadi B, Ellouz-Chaabouni S, Rhimi M, Bejar S. 2008. Biochemical and molecular characterization of a detergent-stable serine alkaline protease from Bacillus pumilus CBS with high catalytic efficiency. Biochimie 90:1291−305

    doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2008.03.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [173]

    Akel H, Al-Quadan F, Yousef TK. 2009. Characterization of a purified thermostable protease from hyperthermophilic Bacillus strain HUTBS71. European Journal of Scientific Research 31:280−88

    Google Scholar

    [174]

    Sarker PK, Talukdar SA, Deb P, Sayem SMS, Mohsina K. 2013. Optimization and partial characterization of culture conditions for the production of alkaline protease from Bacillus licheniformis P003. Springerplus 2:506

    doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-506

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [175]

    Bose A, Chawdhary V, Keharia H, Subramanian RB. 2014. Production and characterization of a solvent-tolerant protease from a novel marine isolate Bacillus tequilensis P15. Annals of Microbiology 64:343−54

    doi: 10.1007/s13213-013-0669-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [176]

    Maruthiah T, Esakkiraj P, Prabakaran G, Palavesam A, Immanuel G. 2013. Purification and characterization of moderately halophilic alkaline serine protease from marine Bacillus subtilis AP-MSU 6. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 2:116−19

    doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2013.03.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [177]

    Benkiar A, Nadia ZJ, Badis A, Rebzani F, Soraya BT, et al. 2013. Biochemical and molecular characterization of a thermo- and detergent-stable alkaline serine keratinolytic protease from Bacillus circulans strain DZ100 for detergent formulations and feather-biodegradation process. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 83:129−38

    doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.05.014

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [178]

    Joshi S, Satyanarayana T. 2013. Characteristics and applications of a recombinant alkaline serine protease from a novel bacterium Bacillus lehensis. Bioresource Technology 131:76−85

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.12.124

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [179]

    Annamalai N, Rajeswari MV, Balasubramanian T. 2014. Extraction, purification and application of thermostable and halostable alkaline protease from Bacillus alveayuensis CAS 5 using marine wastes. Food and Bioproducts Processing 92:335−42

    doi: 10.1016/j.fbp.2013.08.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [180]

    Nilegaonkar SS, Zambare VP, Kanekar PP, Dhakephalkar PK, Sarnaik SS. 2007. Production and partial characterization of dehairing protease from Bacillus cereus MCM B-326. Bioresource Technology 98:1238−45

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.05.003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [181]

    Ahmetoglu N, Bekler FM, Acer O, Guven RG, Guven K. 2015. Production, purification and characterization of thermostable metallo-protease from newly isolated Bacillus sp. KG5. EurAsian Journal of Biosciences 9:1−11

    Google Scholar

    [182]

    Lagzian M, Asoodeh A. 2012. An extremely thermotolerant, alkaliphilic subtilisin-like protease from hyperthermophilic Bacillus sp. MLA64. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 51:960−67

    doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2012.08.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [183]

    Moradian F, Khajeh K, Naderi-Manesh H, Ahmadvand R, Sajedi RH, et al. 2006. Thiol-dependent serine alkaline proteases from Bacillus sp. HR-08 and KR-8102: isolation, production, and characterization. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 134:77−87

    doi: 10.1385/abab:134:1:77

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [184]

    Farhadian S, Asoodeh A, Lagzian M. 2015. Purification, biochemical characterization and structural modeling of a potential htrA-like serine protease from Bacillus subtilis DR8806. Journal of Molecular Catalysis B: Enzymatic 115:51−58

    doi: 10.1016/j.molcatb.2015.02.001

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [185]

    Tekİn N, Cİhan AÇ, Takaç ZS, Tüzün CY, Tunç K, et al. 2012. Alkaline protease production of Bacillus cohnii APT5. Turkish Journal of Biology 36:430−40

    doi: 10.3906/biy-1104-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [186]

    Ahmed I, Zia MA, Iqbal HMN. 2011. Purification and kinetic parameters characterization of an alkaline protease produced from Bacillus subtilis through submerged fermentation technique. World Applied Science Journal 12:751−57

    Google Scholar

    [187]

    Zhou C, Qin H, Chen X, Zhang Y, Xue Y, et al. 2018. A novel alkaline protease from alkaliphilic idiomarina sp C9-1 with potential application for eco-friendly enzymatic dehairing in the leather industry. Scientific Reports 8:16467

    doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34416-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [188]

    Sugumaran KR, Ponnusami V, Gowdhaman D, Gunasekar V, Srivastava SN. 2012. Thermostable alkaline protease production from Bacillus thuringiensis MTCC 1953: optimization and kinetic studies. International Journal of ChemTech Research 4:198−202

    Google Scholar

    [189]

    Subba Rao C, Sathish T, Ravichandra P, Prakasham RS. 2009. Characterization of thermo- and detergent stable serine protease from isolated Bacillus circulans and evaluation of eco-friendly applications. Process Biochemistry 44:262−68

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2008.10.022

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [190]

    Jain D, Pancha I, Mishra SK, Shrivastav A, Mishra S. 2012. Purification and characterization of haloalkaline thermoactive, solvent stable and SDS-induced protease from Bacillus sp.: a potential additive for laundry detergents. Bioresource Technology 115:228−36

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.10.081

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [191]

    Ghobadi Nejad Z, Yaghmaei S, Moghadam N, Sadeghein B. 2014. Some investigations on protease enzyme production kinetics using Bacillus licheniformis BBRC 100053 and effects of inhibitors on protease activity. International Journal of Chemical Engineering 2014:394860

    doi: 10.1155/2014/394860

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [192]

    Adetunji AI, Olaniran AO. 2018. Treatment of lipid-rich wastewater using a mixture of free or immobilized bioemulsifier and hydrolytic enzymes from indigenous bacterial isolates. Desalination and Water Treatment 132:274−80

    doi: 10.5004/dwt.2018.23161

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [193]

    Herman RA, Ayepa E, Zhang WX, Li ZN, Zhu X, et al. 2023. Molecular modification and biotechnological applications of microbial aspartic proteases. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology

    doi: 10.1080/07388551.2023.2171850

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [194]

    Al-Ghanayem AA, Joseph B. 2020. Current prospective in using cold-active enzymes s eco-friendly detergent additive. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 104:2871−82

    doi: 10.1007/s00253-020-10429-x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [195]

    Dai R, Ten AS, Mrksich M. 2019. Profiling protease activity in laundry detergents with peptide arrays and SAMDI mass spectrometry. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 58(25):10692−97

    doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.9b00057

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [196]

    Grbavčić S, Bézbradica D, Izrael-Živković L, Avramović N, Milosavić N, et al. 2011. Production of lipase and protease from an indigenous Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain and their evaluation as detergent additives: compatibility study with detergent ingredients and washing performance. Bioresource Technology 102:11226−33

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.09.076

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [197]

    Baweja M, Tiwari R, Singh PK, Nain L, Shukla P. 2016. An alkaline protease from Bacillus pumilus MP 27: functional analysis of its binding model toward its applications as detergent additive. Frontiers in Microbiology 7:1195

    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01195

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [198]

    Olsen HS, Falholt P. 1998. The role of enzymes in modern detergency. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents 1:555−67

    doi: 10.1007/s11743-998-0058-7

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [199]

    Niyonzima FN, More S. 2015. Detergent-compatible proteases: microbial production, properties, and stain removal analysis. Preparative Biochemistry and Biotechnology 45(3):233−58

    doi: 10.1080/10826068.2014.907183

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [200]

    Nascimento WCAd, Martins MLL. 2006. Studies on the stability of protease from Bacillus sp. and its compatibility with commercial detergent. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 37:307−11

    doi: 10.1590/s1517-83822006000300020

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [201]

    Ghafoor A, Hasnain S. 2009. Characteristics of an extracellular protease isolated from Bacillus subtilis AG-1 and its performance in relation to detergent components. Annals of Microbiology 59:559−63

    doi: 10.1007/BF03175146

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [202]

    Abou-Elela GM, Ibrahim HAH, Hassan SW, Abd-Elnaby H, El-Toukhy NMK. 2011. Alkaline protease production by alkaliphilic marine bacteria isolated from Marsa-Matrouh (Egypt) with special emphasis on Bacillus cereus purified protease. African Journal of Biotechnology 10:4631−42

    Google Scholar

    [203]

    Bezawada J, Yan S, John RP, Tyagi RD, Surampalli RY. 2011. Recovery of Bacillus licheniformis alkaline protease from supernatant of fermented wastewater sludge using ultrafiltration and its characterization. Biotechnology Research International 2011:238549

    doi: 10.4061/2011/238549

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [204]

    Jaouadi B, Abdelmalek B, Jaouadib NZ, Bejar S. 2011. The bioengineering and industrial applications of bacterial alkaline proteases: the case of SAPB and KERAB. In Progress in Molecular and Environmental Bioengineering - From Analysis and Modeling to Technology Applications, ed. Carpi A. Rijeka: IntechOpen. http://doi.org/10.5772/23850

    [205]

    Mojsov K. 2011. Applications of enzymes in the textile industry: a review. 2nd International Congress: Engineering, Ecology and Materials in the Processing Industry: Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Tehnoloski Fakultet Zvornik. pp. 230−39

    [206]

    Navarro D, Wu J, Lin W, Fullana-i-Palmer P, Puig R. 2020. Life cycle assessment and leather production. Journal of Leather Science and Engineering 2(1):321−33

    doi: 10.1186/s42825-020-00035-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [207]

    Choudhary RB, Jana AK, Jha MK. 2004. Enzyme technology applications in leather processing. Indian Journal of Chemical Technology 11:659−71

    Google Scholar

    [208]

    Famielec S. 2020. Chromium concentrate recovery from solid tannery waste in a thermal process. Materials 13(7):1533

    doi: 10.3390/ma13071533

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [209]

    Hasan MJ, Haque P, Rahman MM. 2022. Protease enzyme based cleaner leather processing: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production 365:132826

    doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132826

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [210]

    Adrio JL, Demain AL. 2014. Microbial enzymes: tools for biotechnological processes. Biomolecules 4:117−39

    doi: 10.3390/biom4010117

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [211]

    Khambhaty Y. 2020. Applications of enzymes in leather processing. Environmental Chemistry Letters 18:747−69

    doi: 10.1007/s10311-020-00971-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [212]

    de Souza FR, Gutterres M. 2012. Application of enzymes in leather processing: a comparison between chemical and coenzymatic processes. Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering 29:471−81

    doi: 10.1590/s0104-66322012000300004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [213]

    Biškauskaitė R, Valeikienė V, Valeika V. 2021. Enzymes for leather processing: effect on pickling and chroming. Materials 14(6):1480

    doi: 10.3390/ma14061480

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [214]

    Jaouadi NZ, Rekik H, Badis A, Trabelsi S, Belhoul M, et al. 2013. Biochemical and molecular characterization of a serine keratinase from Brevibacillus brevis US575 with promising keratin-biodegradation and hide-dehairing activities. PLoS ONE 8:e76722

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076722

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [215]

    Arunachalam C, Sarita K. 2009. Protease enzyme: an eco-friendly alternative for leather industry. Indian Journal of Science and Technology 2:29−32

    doi: 10.17485/ijst/2009/v2i12.10

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [216]

    Vijayaraghavan P, Lazarus S, Vincent SGP. 2014. De-hairing protease production by an isolated Bacillus cereus strain AT under solid-state fermentation using cow dung: biosynthesis and properties. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences 21:27−34

    doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2013.04.010

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [217]

    Kshetri P, Ningthoujam DS. 2016. Keratinolytic activities of alkaliphilic Bacillus sp. MBRL 575 from a novel habitat, limestone deposit site in Manipur, India. SpringerPlus 5:595

    doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-2239-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [218]

    Ward OP. 2011. Proteases. In Comprehensive Biotechnology, ed. Moo-Young M. 2nd Edition. Burlington: Academic Press. pp. 571−82. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-088504-9.00222-1

    [219]

    Pai JS. 2003. Application of microorganisms in food biotechnology. Indian Journal of Biotechnology 2:382−86

    Google Scholar

    [220]

    Qureshi MA, Khare AK, Pervez A. 2015. Enzymes used in dairy industries. International Journal of Applied Research 1:523−27

    Google Scholar

    [221]

    Arshad MS, Kwon JH, Imran M, Sohaib M, Aslam A, et al. 2016. Plant and bacterial proteases: a key towards improving meat tenderization, a mini review. Cogent Food and Agriculture 2(1):1261780

    doi: 10.1080/23311932.2016.1261780

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [222]

    Dahiya S, Bajaj BK, Kumar A, Tiwari SK, Singh B. 2020. A review on biotechnological potential of multifarious enzymes in bread making. Process Biochemistry 99:290−306

    doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2020.09.002

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [223]

    Meghwanshi GK, Kaur N, Verma S, Dabi NK, Vashishtha A, et al. 2020. Enzymes for pharmaceutical and therapeutic applications. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 67(4):586−601

    doi: 10.1002/bab.1919

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [224]

    Verma A, Singh H, Anwar S, Chattopadhyay A, Tiwari KK, et al. 2017. Microbial keratinases: industrial enzymes with waste management potential. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 37(4):476−91

    doi: 10.1080/07388551.2016.1185388

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [225]

    Karam J, Nicell JA. 1997. Potential applications of enzymes in waste treatment. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 69:141−53

    doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4660(199706)69:2<141::AID-JCTB694>3.0.CO;2-U

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [226]

    Pandey D, Singh R, Chand D. 2011. An improved bioprocess for synthesis of acetohydroxamic acid using DTT (dithiothreitol) treated resting cells of Bacillus sp. APB-6. Bioresource Technology 102:6579−86

    doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.071

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [227]

    Venugopal V, Alur MD, Nerkar DP. 1989. Solubilization of fish proteins using immobilized microbial cells. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 33:1098−1103

    doi: 10.1002/bit.260330904

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [228]

    Abdul Gafar A, Khayat ME, Ahmad SA, Yasid NA, Shukor MY. 2020. Response surface methodology for the optimization of keratinase production in culture medium containing feathers by Bacillus sp. UPM-AAG1. Catalysts 10:848

    doi: 10.3390/catal10080848

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [229]

    Nnolim NE, Udenigwe CC, Okoh AI, Nwodo UU. 2020. Microbial keratinase: next generation green catalyst and prospective applications. Frontiers in Microbiology 11:580164

    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.580164

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [230]

    Kojima M, Kanai M, Tominaga M, Kitazume S, Inoue A, et al. 2006. Isolation and characterization of a feather-degrading enzyme from Bacillus pseudofirmus FA30-01. Extremophiles 10:229−35

    doi: 10.1007/s00792-005-0491-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [231]

    Cortezi M, Contiero J, de Lima CJB, Lovaglio RB, Monti R. 2008. Characterization of a feather degrading by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens protease: a new strain. World Journal of Agricultural Science 4:648−56

    Google Scholar

    [232]

    Ni H, Chen QH, Chen F, Fu ML, Dong YC, et al. 2011. Improved keratinase production for feather degradation by Bacillus licheniformis ZJUEL31410 in submerged cultivation. African Journal of Biotechnology 10:7236−44

    Google Scholar

    [233]

    Ul Haq I, Akram F, Jabbar Z. 2020. Keratinolytic enzyme-mediated biodegradation of recalcitrant poultry feathers waste by newly isolated Bacillus sp. NKSP-7 under submerged fermentation. Folia Microbiologica 65:823−34

    doi: 10.1007/s12223-020-00793-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [234]

    Dalev PG. 1994. Utilisation of waste feathers from poultry slaughter for production of a protein concentrate. Bioresource Technology 48:265−67

    doi: 10.1016/0960-8524(94)90156-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [235]

    Mukhopadhyay RP, Chandra AL. 1992. Application of Streptomycete in the removal of waste keratinous materials. In Industrial Biotechnology, eds. Malik VS, Sridhar P. New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. pp. 595−97

    [236]

    Takami H, Nakamura S, Aono R, Horikoshi K. 1992. Degradation of human hair by a thermostable alkaline protease from alkaliphilic Bacillus sp. no. AH-101. Bioscience, Biotechnology and Biochemistry 56:1667−69

    doi: 10.1271/bbb.56.1667

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [237]

    Li Q. 2021. Structure, application, and biochemistry of microbial keratinases. Frontiers in Microbiology 12:674345

    doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.674345

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [238]

    Chanalia P, Gandhi D, Jodha D, Singh J. 2011. Applications of microbial proteases in pharmaceutical industry: an overview. Reviews in Medical Microbiology 22:96−101

    doi: 10.1097/MRM.0b013e3283494749

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [239]

    Kudrya VA, Simonenko IA. 1994. Alkaline serine proteinase and lectin isolation from the culture fluid of Bacillus subtilis. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 41:505

    doi: 10.1007/BF00178480

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [240]

    Altaf F, Wu S, Kasim V. 2021. Role of fibrinolytic enzymes in anti-thrombosis therapy. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 8:680397

    doi: 10.3389/fmolb.2021.680397

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [241]

    Vaisar T, Pennathur S, Green PS, Gharib SA, Hoofnagle AN, et al. 2007. Shotgun proteomics implicates protease inhibition and complement activation in the antiinflammatory properties of HDL. The Journal of Clinical Investigation 117:746−56

    doi: 10.1172/JCI26206

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [242]

    Tamimi Z, Al Habashneh R, Hamad I, Al-Ghazawi M, Abu Roqa'a A, et al. 2021. Efficacy of serratiopeptidase after impacted third molar surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. BMC Oral Health 21:91

    doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-01451-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [243]

    Fossati A. 1999. Antiinflammatory effects of seaprose-S on various inflammation models. Drugs under Experimental and Clinical Research 24:263−70

    Google Scholar

    [244]

    Watanabe K. 2004. Collagenolytic proteases from bacteria. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 63:520−26

    doi: 10.1007/s00253-003-1442-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [245]

    Alipour H, Raz A, Zakeri S, Dinparast Djadid N. 2016. Therapeutic applications of collagenase (metalloproteases): a review. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine 6(11):975−81

    doi: 10.1016/j.apjtb.2016.07.017

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [246]

    Wu JA, Kusuma C, Mond JJ, Kokai-Kun JF. 2003. Lysostaphin disrupts Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms on artificial surfaces. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 47:3407−14

    doi: 10.1128/AAC.47.11.3407-3414.2003

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [247]

    Bastos MCF, Coutinho BG, Coelho MLV. 2010. Lysostaphin: a staphylococcal bacteriolysin with potential clinical applications. Pharmaceuticals 3:1139−61

    doi: 10.3390/ph3041139

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [248]

    Jayakumar J, Kumar VA, Biswas L, Biswas R. 2021. Therapeutic applications of lysostaphin against Staphylococcus aureus. Journal of Applied Microbiology 131(3):1072−82

    doi: 10.1111/jam.14985

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [249]

    Pratt CB, Simone JV, Zee P, Aur RJA, Johnson WW. 1970. Comparison of daily versus weekly L-asparaginase for the treatment of childhood acute leukemia. Journal of Pediatrics 77:474−83

    doi: 10.1016/S0022-3476(70)80023-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [250]

    Siritapetawee J, Thammasirirak S, Samosornsuk W. 2012. Antimicrobial activity of a 48-kDa protease (AMP48) from Artocarpus heterophyllus latex. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 16:132−37

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Adetunji AI, Olaitan MO, Erasmus M, Olaniran AO. 2023. Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability. Food Materials Research 3:12 doi: 10.48130/FMR-2023-0012
    Adetunji AI, Olaitan MO, Erasmus M, Olaniran AO. 2023. Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability. Food Materials Research 3:12 doi: 10.48130/FMR-2023-0012

Figures(1)  /  Tables(4)

Article Metrics

Article views(2736) PDF downloads(364)

REVIEW   Open Access    

Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability

Food Materials Research  3 Article number: 12  (2023)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Proteases are among the most important classes of hydrolytic enzymes and occupy a key position due to their applicability in both physiological and commercial fields. They are essential constituents of all forms of life, including plants, animals, and microorganisms. However, microorganisms represent an attractive source for protease secretion due to their high productivity in a relatively short time and limited space requirements for cultivation, amongst others. Microbial proteases are produced by submerged or solid-state fermentation process during post-exponential or stationary growth phase. The production of these biocatalysts by microbes is influenced by nutritional and physicochemical parameters. Downstream recovery of high-value enzyme products from culture supernatant using suitable techniques is imperative prior to further use of the biocatalysts. Immobilization of these enzymes in appropriate matrices permits reusability, reclamation, enhanced stability and cost-effectiveness of the biocatalysts. The catalytic properties of microbial proteases help in the discovery of enzymes with high activity and stability, over extreme temperatures and pH for utilization in large-scale bioprocesses. This review provides insights into microbial proteases taking cognizance of the bioprocess parameters influencing microbial proteases production coupled with methods employed for protease purification as well as the immobilization and biochemical properties of the biocatalysts for potential biotechnological applications.

    • Enzymes are biomolecules that consist of amino acid subunits linked together by amide bonds. They are highly discerning biocatalysts that accelerate the rate and specificity of biological reactions by reducing the activation energy without any structural modification[13]. The active site of these macromolecules is domiciled within hydrophobic pockets, which determines their specificity for substrate[4]. Enzymes are secreted by living organisms and are required to sustain life. Enzymes play a crucial role in numerous biotechnological applications. Currently, the most commonly used (more than 75%) enzymes for commercial applications are hydrolases, which catalyze the hydrolysis of various natural molecules[5]. However, proteases are recognized as the leading enzyme due to their versatility in biotechnology[2,6].

      Proteases are the largest and the most complex group of enzymes that catalyze the breakdown of proteins by cleaving of peptide bonds that exist between amino acid residues in a polypeptide chain[7,8]. They constitute one of the most important groups of enzymes, accounting for more than 65% of the total industrial enzyme market[914]. They are ubiquitous in nature and obtained from a wide variety of sources, including plants[1520], animals[2123] and microorganisms[24]. However, the failure of plant and animal proteases to meet global demands has led to an increased interest in microbial proteases.

      Microbial proteases are among the most important and extensively studied hydrolytic enzymes since the beginning of enzymology[24]. They constitute more than 40% of the total worldwide production of enzymes[25,26]. They are produced by a large number of microbes, including bacteria, fungi, and yeasts (Table 1)[27,28]. The microorganisms represent an excellent source of proteases due to their rapid growth, broad biochemical diversity, ease of genetic manipulation, and limited space requirements for cultivation. In addition, the microorganisms can be cultivated in large amounts in a relatively short time by an established fermentation process for mass production of the enzymes[61]. Microbial proteases are secreted directly into the fermentation medium by the producing organisms, thus shortening the downstream processing of the enzyme[24]. They have a longer shelf life and can be preserved for a long period of time without significant loss of activity. However, of all microbial sources, bacterial proteases are of particular interest due to their high catalytic activity and stability at optimal pH and temperature and broad substrate specificity[6266]. Furthermore, microbial proteases are employed in various biotechnological applications, including detergent, chemical, pharmaceutical, textile, food and feed and leather industries, as well as in silver recovery and waste management (Fig. 1)[1114,27,6776]. This review, therefore, focuses on microbial proteases with special emphasis on bioprocess parameters influencing microbial protease production coupled with techniques for downstream purification of proteases. In addition, strategies employed for immobilization of the biocatalysts in or on appropriate support materials as well as the biochemical properties of the enzymes were also discussed for a proper understanding of the potential of the biocatalysts for industrial, environmental, and biomedical applications.

      Table 1.  Some protease-producing microorganisms.

      MicroorganismReference
      Bacteria
      Bacillus sp. CL18[29]
      Bacillus aryabhattai Ab15-ES[30]
      Bacillus stearothermophilus[31]
      Bacillus amyloliquefaciens[32]
      Geobacillus toebii LBT 77[33]
      Pseudomonas fluorescens BJ-10[34]
      Streptomyces sp. DPUA 1576[35]
      Vibrio mimicus VM 573[36]
      Lactobacillus helveticus M92[37]
      Microbacterium sp. HSL10[38]
      Serratia marcescens RSPB 11[39]
      Listeria monocytogenes[40]
      Brevibacterium linens ATCC 9174[41]
      Alteromonas sp.[42]
      Halobacillus blutaparonensis M9[43]
      Staphylococcus epidermidis[44]
      Yersinia ruckeri[45]
      Geobacillus stearothermophilus[46]
      Stenotrophomonas sp.[47]
      Aeromonas veronii OB3[48]
      Fungi
      Alternaria solani[49]
      Aspergillus niger DEF 1[50]
      Penicillium sp. LCJ228[51]
      Fusarium solani[52]
      Rhizopus stolonifer[53]
      Trichoderma viridiae VPG12[54]
      Mucor sp.[55]
      Moorella speciosa[56]
      Beauveria sp.[7]
      Cephalosporium sp. KSM 388[57]
      Yeasts
      Wickerhamomyces anomalus 227[58]
      Metschnikovia pulcherrima 446[58]
      Candida spp.[13]
      Yarrowia lipolytica[59]
      Rhototorula mucilaginosa KKU-M12C[60]
      Cryptococcus albidus KKU-M13C[60]

      Figure 1. 

      Schematic diagram showing some potential biotechnological applications of microbial proteases.

    • Microbial proteases are produced by submerged fermentation and to a lesser extent by solid-state fermentation processes during the post-exponential or stationary growth phase[7779]. However, submerged fermentation is mostly preferred due to its easy engineering and improved process control. In addition, submerged fermentation permits ease of enzyme reclamation for downstream processing, even distribution of microbial cells in the culture medium, and reduced fermentation time[77,78]. Protease production from microorganisms is constitutive or partially inducible in nature, and the type of substrate utilized in the fermentation medium mostly influences their synthesis. The selection of appropriate inducible substrates and microbial strains is paramount for the production of the desired metabolite[30,8084].

    • Various bioprocess parameters (such as carbon and nitrogen sources, pH, temperature, metal ions, inoculum volume, incubation period, agitation speed, etc.) affect protease secretion by microorganisms. Each microbe requires optimum conditions of the parameters for maximum protease production[30]. These nutritional and physicochemical parameters are discussed below.

    • Extracellular protease production by microorganisms is strongly influenced by the presence of suitable carbon sources in the culture medium. Enhanced yields of protease synthesis by addition of different carbon sources have been reported by different authors[30,85]. For instance, Sharma et al.[86] recorded maximum protease production by a bacterial strain AKS-4 when glucose was used as a carbon source in the growth media at a concentration of 1% (w/v), resulting in a maximum activity of 59.10 U/ml. In another study, Adetunji & Olaniran[30] investigated the influence of different carbon sources including fructose, galactose, mannose, maltose, sucrose, lactose, and soluble starch on protease production by Bacillus aryabhattai Ab15-ES. Maximum protease production (67.73 U/ml) was recorded in the presence of maltose.

    • Microbial protease production is greatly influenced by the presence of a variety of nitrogen sources in the fermentation medium[24]. Although complex nitrogen sources are commonly utilized for protease secretion by most microorganisms, the requirement for a particular nitrogen supplement differs from one organism to another[13,27]. In most microorganisms, both organic and inorganic nitrogen sources are metabolized to produce amino acids, nucleic acids, proteins and other cell wall components[27,67]. Several authors have employed organic (simple or complex) and inorganic nitrogen sources for enhancement of protease production. These nitrogen sources have regulatory effects on protease synthesis. Kumar et al.[87] studied the effect of organic and inorganic nitrogen sources on protease production by Marinobacter sp. GA CAS9. Results obtained revealed that organic nitrogen sources induced higher protease production than inorganic nitrogen sources, with maximum protease production (249.18 U/ml) recorded in the presence of beef extract. Badhe et al.[88] studied the influence of nitrogen sources namely, ammonium nitrate, ammonium chloride, ammonium sulphate, yeast extract, potassium nitrate, and sodium nitrate on extracellular protease production by Bacillus subtilis. Yeast extract was found to be the best nitrogen source to stimulate maximum protease production. Urea and sodium nitrate have been reported as the best organic and inorganic nitrogen sources, respectively for extracellular protease production by Bacillus licheniformis ATCC 12759[89].

    • Several physicochemical parameters including pH, temperature, agitation speed, incubation period, metal ions, inoculum volume etc. influence protease secretion[9092]. These parameters are essential to promote the growth of microorganisms for protease production. For instance, slightly acidic medium with pH range of 6.3−6.5 has been found as optimum for protease production by Bacillus sp. MIG and Bacillus cereus SIU1[93,94]. Maximum protease production by Bacillus subtilis NS and Pseudomonas fluorescens was recorded when the initial pH of the fermentation media was 9.0[95,96]. Higher initial pH values of 12.0 (Bacillus cereus S8), 10.5 (Bacillus circulans), and 10.7 (Bacillus sp. 2-5)[9799] have also been reported for maximum protease production.

      In addition, incubation temperature is a crucial environmental parameter for the production of proteases, since it affects microbial growth and synthesis of the enzyme by changing the properties of the cell wall[100]. Optimum temperatures of 30, 37, 40, and 60 °C for protease production by Pseudomonas aeruginosa MCM B-327[101], Bacillus subtilis AKRS3[102], Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15[100], and Bacillus polymyxa[103], respectively have been reported. Agitation speed influences the degree of mixing of fermentation media in shake flasks or bioreactor for the supply of dissolved oxygen needed for the growth of microorganisms for protease production[104,105]. Maximum protease production has been reported at agitation speed of 150 rpm (Bacillus sp. CR-179; Aspergillus ochraceus BT21) and 200 rpm (Bacillus mojavensis SA)[106108]. Incubation period considerably affects microbial protease production, and varies (24 h to 1 week), based on the microorganism type and culture conditions[109]. Metal ions promote microbial protease production. For instance, Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, and Ba2+ enhance protease secretion by Bacillus cereus BG1, Bacillus subtilis NS, Brevibacillus sp. OA30, and Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15, respectively[95,100,110,111]. However, metal ions can render inhibitory effects on protease production by microorganisms[112].

    • After fermentative production of enzymes, the cell-free culture supernatant (regarded as crude enzyme) is purified for the reclamation of value-added enzyme products using a variety of techniques[61,113]. The selection of suitable purification methods is dependent on the source of the biocatalyst (extracellular or intracellular). Such techniques should be cost-effective and efficient for high-value enzyme purification[114,115]. The advantages and disadvantages of these techniques are highlighted in Table 2 and described below.

      Table 2.  Advantages and disadvantages of protease purification methods.

      Purification methodAdvantageDisadvantage
      UltrafiltrationHigh product throughput; lower complexity; economical; low maintenance; requires no chemicalsClogging of membrane hinders purification process
      PrecipitationSimple; reduces enzyme solubility in aqueous solutionNot efficient for complete enzyme purification; time consuming; difficult to use for large-scale enzyme purification
      Ion-exchange chromatographyHigh separation efficiency; simple; controllableBuffer requirement; pH dependence; inconsistency in columns; expensive columns
      Affinity chromatographyHigh sensitivity and specificity; gives high degree of enzyme purityDifficult to handle; requires limited sample volume; low productivity; uses expensive ligands; non-specific adsorption
      Hydrophobic interaction chromatographyVersatile; non-denaturingRequirement for non-volatile mobile phase
    • Because of the low amounts of enzyme in the cell-free supernatant, excess water is usually removed for the recovery of the enzyme. This is achieved via membrane separation processes such as ultrafiltration. This pressure-driven separation process is inexpensive and leads to a slight loss of enzyme activity. It is used for purification, concentration, and diafiltration of enzyme, or for changing the salt composition of a given sample[27,116,117]. However, the major drawbacks of this technique include fouling or clogging of membranes, resulting from precipitates formed by the final product[118].

    • Precipitation is the most frequently used technique for the separation of enzymes from crude culture supernatants[31,119]. It is carried out by the addition of inorganic salt (ammonium sulphate) or organic solvent (acetone or ethanol), which reduces the solubility of the desired enzymes in an aqueous solution[120,121].

    • Ion exchange chromatography is employed for the production of purified proteases. The enzymes are positively charged biomolecules and are not bound to anion exchangers[27,122]. As a result, cation exchangers are a rational choice for the elution of the bound molecules from the column by increasing the salt or pH gradient[24]. The commonly employed matrices for ion-exchange chromatography include diethyl amino ethyl and carboxy methyl, which, upon binding to the charged enzyme molecules, adsorb the proteins to the matrices. Elution of the adsorbed protein molecule is achieved by a gradient change in pH or ionic strength of the eluting buffer[24,123].

    • The most commonly used adsorbents for protease purification by affinity chromatography include hydroxyapatite, immobilized N-benzoyloxycarbonyl phenylalanine agarose, immobilized casein glutamic acid, aprotinin-agarose, and casein-agarose[124,125]. However, the ultimate disadvantage of this technique is the high costs of enzyme supports and the labile nature of some affinity ligands, thus reducing its use on a large scale[24,27,126].

    • Hydrophobic interaction chromatography is based on the variation of external hydrophobic amino acid residues on different proteins, resulting in protein interaction[127]. In aqueous solvents, hydrophobic patches on proteins preferentially interrelate with other hydrophobic surfaces[128]. These hydrophobic interactions are reinforced by high salt concentrations and higher temperatures and are weakened by the presence of detergents or miscible organic solvents[129]. The degree of binding of a hydrophobic protein depends on the type and density of substitution of the matrix as well as on the nature of buffer conditions[24].

    • Enzyme immobilization refers to the physical confinement of enzymes in a defined region (matrix) to retain the activity of the biocatalysts[130,131]. Immobilization of enzymes in appropriate insoluble supports is a vital tool to fabricate biomolecules with a variety of functional properties[132,133]. It offers many distinct advantages, including reusability of immobilized biocatalysts, rapid termination of reactions, controlled product formation, and ease of reclamation of insolubilized enzymes from reaction mixture[134136]. In addition, insolubilization of enzymes by attachment to a matrix provides several benefits, such as enhanced stability, possible modulation of the catalytic properties, reduction in the cost of enzymes and enzyme products, and adaptability to various engineering designs[137142].

      The characteristics of a matrix are crucial in determining the effectiveness of the immobilized enzyme system[130]. The characteristics of a good matrix include hydrophilicity, non-toxicity, biodegradability, resistance to microbial invasion and compression, biocompatibility, inertness towards enzymes, and affordability[143]. The selection of appropriate support materials influences the immobilization process. The support materials can be grouped into two categories namely, organic and inorganic based on their chemical components, or natural and synthetic polymers. These include porous glass[144], aluminium oxide, titanium, hydroxyapatite, ceramics, celite[130,134, 145,146], carboxymethyl cellulose, starch, collagen, sepharose, resins, silica[147], agarose[148,149], clay[150], and some mesoporous polymers[151].

      The choice of a suitable immobilization technique is paramount for the immobilization process, as it determines the activity and characteristics of the enzyme in a particular biochemical reaction[56,130]. Methods such as entrapment, adsorption, cross-linking, and covalent bonding are commonly used for enzyme immobilization[152155]. Immobilization of protease from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SP1 by entrapment in various matrices, including alginate, agar, and polyacrylamide has been reported[156]. The immobilized enzyme showed enhanced protease activity and reusability with beads prepared with different polymers. In addition, Bacillus subtilis M-11 protease immobilized on polysulfone membrane (containing silica gel-3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane) by physical adsorption displayed improved stability and retention of its activity (77.3%) after ten consecutive batches[155]. Ibrahim et al.[157] immobilized protease from Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15 onto hollow core-mesoporous shell silica nanospheres by covalent attachment and physical adsorption. The immobilized enzyme recorded significant thermal and organic solvent stability with a considerable catalytic activity for 12 consecutive batches. Silva et al.[158] studied the immobilization of protease (Esperase) by covelent bonding to Eudragit S-100 through carbodiimide coupling. The immobilized enzyme exhibited a good thermal and storage stability and reusability in comparison to the native enzyme.

    • Proteases from different microorganisms have been extensively studied for suitability for various specific applications based on their properties[27,159]. For biotechnological applications, proteases must possess higher activity and stability at relatively extreme temperatures, pH, and in organic solvents, oxidizing agents, detergents, etc.[48,160]. The essential properties of some microbial proteases are presented in Table 3 and discussed below.

      Table 3.  Biochemical properties of some microbial proteases.

      MicroorganismpH optimaTemperature optima (°C)Kinetics parameter
      (Km and Vmax)
      Substrate specificityReference
      Bacillus sp. CL188.055Casein and soy protein[29]
      Bacillus caseinilyticus8.060Casein, bovine serum albumin, gelatin and egg albumin[161]
      Bacillus licheniformis A109.0700.033 mg/ml & 8.17 µmol/ml/minCasein[162]
      Bacillus licheniformis UV-911.0605 mg/ml & 61.58 µM/ml/minCasein, haemoglobin and bovine albumin[163]
      Bacillus pumilus MCAS89.060Bovine serum albumin, casein, haemoglobin, skim milk, azocasein and gelatin[164]
      Bacillus pseudofirmus10500.08 mg/ml & 6.346 µM/minCasein[26]
      Bacillus circulans MTCC 794210603.1 mg/ml & 1.8 µmol/minCasein[165]
      Bacillus circulans M3411500.96 mg/ml & 9.548 µmol/ml/minCasein, ovalbumin and bovine serum albumin[166]
      Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SP18.0600.125 mg/ml & 12820 µg/mlCasein[156]
      Bacillus sp. NPST-AK1510.5602.5 mg/ml & 42.5 µM/min/mgGelatin, bovine serum albumin and casein[8]
      Stenotrophomonas maltophilia SK9.040Bovine serum albumin, casein and gelatin[167]
      Stenotrophomonas sp. IIIM-ST04510.015[47]
      Aeribacillus pallidus C109.0600.197 mg/ml & 7.29 µmol/ml/minCasein[168]
      Geobacillus toebii LBT 7713.0951 mg/ml & 217.5 U/ml[33]
      Streptomyces sp. M309.08035.7 mg/ml & 5 × 104 U/mgCasein, bovine serum albumin, bovine serum fibrin[169]
      Alternaria solani9.050[49]
      Beauveria bassiana AM-1188.035−400.216 and 0.7184 mM & 3.33 and 1.17 U/mg[170]
    • A significant level of proteolytic activity over a broad range of pH is required for protease to be employed for various biotechnological applications[46,171]. In general, microbial proteases exhibit high activity at an optimum pH range of between 8.0 and 12.0[28]. Optimum pH and stability of protease from Aeribacillus pallidus C10 have been reported[168]. The enzyme was found to be active within a broad pH range of 7.0−10.0, with maximum activity recorded at pH 9.0. The protease retained its activity by more than 70% in the range of pH 6.0−10.5 after 2 h of incubation. Proteases from Bacillus pumilus CBS, Bacillus strain HUTBS71, and Bacillus licheniformis with similar pH stability profiles have been reported[172174]. Ibrahim et al.[8] assessed the influence of pH on the activity and stability of the protease produced by Bacillus sp. NPST-AK15. The enzyme was active in a wide pH range (7.0−12.0), with maximum activity recorded at pH 10.5. The protease was 100% stable at pH 9.0−10.5, retaining 96.6 and 92.3% of its activity at pH 8.0 and 11.0, respectively, and more than 80% of its initial activity retained at pH 12.0 after 2 h. Protease from Bacillus circulans MTCC 7942 exhibited activity in the range of 8.0−13.0 with optimum activity recorded at pH 10.0. The enzyme maintained its stability in a wide range of pH (7.0−12.0) for 24 h, retaining 90% activity in the pH range (8.0−12.0)[165]. Similar results have also been reported for proteases from Bacillus tequilensis P15[175], Bacillus subtilis AP-MSU6[176], Bacillus circulans[177], Bacillus lehensis[178], and Bacillus alveayuensis CAS 5[179] showing optimal pH in the range of 8.0−12.0. Maximum activity of protease from Bacillus pumilus MCAS8 at pH 9.0 and stability in the range of 7.0−11.0 after 30 min have been observed[164]. Remarkably, protease from Bacillus circulans M34 showed maximum activity at an optimum pH of 11.0 and was found to be active over a broad pH range (4.0−12.0)[166]. The enzyme was stable over a wide pH range, maintaining 97% of its original activity at pH 8.0−11.0 after 1 h.

    • Most of the microbial proteases are active and stable at a broad range of temperatures (50-70 °C). The activity of proteases at broad temperatures and thermostability form a crucial feature required for employability of the enzyme in industries[32]. Proteases from Bacillus sp., Streptomyces sp., and Thermus sp. are stable at high temperatures; the addition of calcium chloride further improves the enzyme’s thermostability[180]. In addition, some proteases possess exceptionally high thermostability with no decrease in activity at 60−70 °C for up to 3 h[171]. Ahmetoglu et al.[181] investigated the characteristics of protease from Bacillus sp. KG5. The enzyme was found to be active at 40−45 °C and stable at 50 °C in the presence of 2 mM CaCl2 after 120 min. Thebti et al.[33] characterized a haloalkaline protease from Geobacillus toebii LBT 77 newly isolated from a Tunisian hot spring. The enzyme was active between 70 and 100 °C with an optimum activity recorded at 95 °C. The protease was extremely stable at 90 °C after 180 min. Similar results have also been reported for protease from Bacillus sp. MLA64[182]. This activation and stability at higher temperatures were probably due to the partial thermal inactivation of the protease. Protease from Bacillus caseinilyticus was found to be active at 30−60 °C, with maximum activity attained at 60 °C, indicating the thermotolerant nature of the enzyme[161]. Maximum proteolytic activity of Bacillus strains HR-08 and KR-8102 isolated in the soil of western and northern parts of Iran has been recorded at 65 and 50 °C, respectively[183]. Protease from Bacillus subtilis DR8806 showed the highest activity at 45 °C and was stable up to 70 °C[184]. Bacillus cohnii APT5 protease has been reported to be active at a broad range of temperatures, between 30 and 75 °C with maximum activity attained at 50 °C[185]. The enzyme was found to be stable from 40 to 70 °C.

    • Since enzymes are natural catalysts that accelerate chemical reactions, the speed of any fastidious reaction being catalyzed by a particular enzyme can only reach a certain maximum value. This is known as the maximum velocity (Vmax) whereas the Michaelis-Menten constant (Km) is the concentration of substrate at which half of the maximal velocity was attained[31,186]. The relationship between the rate of reaction and the concentration of substrate depends on the affinity of the enzyme for its substrate; this is usually expressed as the Km[186]. An enzyme with a low Km has a greater affinity for its substrate. Both Km and Vmax are important for developing an enzyme-based process[187]. Knowledge of such parameters is essential for assessing the commercial applications of protease under different conditions[24,188]. Substrates including casein, azocasein, etc. are employed to determine the kinetic properties of proteases. Different Km and Vmax values have been reported for proteases. The Km and Vmax values of protease from Bacillus licheniformis A10 were determined to be 0.033 mg/ml and 8.17 µmol/ml/min, respectively in the presence of casein[162]. This Km value was found to be lower when compared to that of proteases from Bacillus licheniformis UV-9[163], Bacillus circulans[189] and Bacillus sp.[190], suggesting a high affinity of the enzyme for the substrate. In another study, Km and Vmax values of 0.626 mM and 0.0523 mM/min, respectively were recorded for protease from Bacillus licheniformis BBRC 100053 using casein[191]. Protease from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SP1 showed Km and Vmax values of 0.125 mg/ml and 12,820 µg/min, respectively in the presence of casein, indicating high affinity and efficient catalytic activity of the enzyme[156].

    • Microbial proteases are robust enzymes with significant biotechnological applications in detergents, leather processing, silver recovery, pharmaceutical, dairy, baking, beverages, feeds, and chemical industries, as well as in several bioremediation processes, contributing to the formation of high value-added products (Fig. 1)[28, 192]. In addition, the proteases are employed in degumming of silk and biopolishing of wool in the textile industry and as an essential tool in peptide synthesis as well as in molecular biology and genetic engineering experiments[193]. The various applications of microbial proteases are elucidated in Table 4 and discussed explicitly below.

      Table 4.  Some potential biotechnological applications of microbial proteases

      IndustryApplicationProduct
      DetergentRemove proteinaceous stains from clothes
      Improve washing performance in domestic laundry
      Clean fabrics
      LeatherSoaking, dehairing and bating
      Enhance leather quality
      Reduce or eliminate dependence on toxic chemicals
      Soft, supple and pliable leather
      FoodMeat tenderization; modification of wheat gluten; cheese-making; preparation of soy hydrolysates; improves extensibility and strength of doughProtein hydrolysate; cheese; soy sauce and soy products; meat products; enhanced dough volume
      Waste managementSolubilize (degrade) proteinaceous wastesAdditives in feeds and fertilizer
      BiomedicineAntimicrobial agents, anti-inflammatory agents, anti-cancer agents, anti-tumor agents, thrombolytic agentsTherapeutics and pharmaceuticals
      PhotographicRecover silver from X-ray filmsSecondary silver
      TextileSilk degummingHigh strength silk fibre; sericin powder
    • The detergent industry forms the largest industrial application of enzymes, accounting for 25%−30% of the total worldwide markets for enzymes[194]. Microbial proteases are dominant in commercial applications, with a substantial share of the market utilized in laundry detergent[27,195]. They are used as additives in detergent formulations for the removal of proteinaceous stains from clothes, resulting from food, blood, and other body secretions as well as to improve washing performance in domestic laundry and cleaning of contact lenses or dentures[19,196,197]. The use of proteases in detergent products offers colossal advantages since these products contain fewer bleaching agents and phosphates, thus, rendering beneficial effects on public and environmental health[198,199]. Generally, an ideal protease used as detergent additives should have a long shelf life as well as high activity and stability over a wide range of pH and temperature[48]. In addition, the enzymes should be efficient at low amounts and compatible with various detergent components along with chelating and oxidizing agents[19,27,61]. This is noteworthy because proteases from Bacillus cereus, Bacillus pumilus CBS, Bacillus licheniformis, Bacillus brevis, and Bacillus subtilis AG-1 have been reported to exhibit robust detergent compatibility in the presence of calcium chloride and glycine (used as stabilizers)[200204].

    • Leather processing involves a series of stages including, curing, soaking, liming, dehairing, bating, pickling, degreasing, and tanning[205,206]. Conventional approaches of leather processing involving the use of hazardous chemicals such as sodium sulfide, lime, and amines generate severe health hazards and environmental pollution[207,208]. As a result, the use of biodegradable enzymes as substitutes for chemicals has proved successful in enhancing leather quality and reducing environmental pollution[19,209211]. Enzymatic dehairing processes are attractive for preserving the hair and contribute to a fall in the organic load discharged into effluent. In addition, it minimizes or eliminates the dependence on toxic chemicals[212,213]. Due to their elastolytic and keratinolytic activity, proteases are employed for selective breakdown of non-collagenous constituents of the skin and for elimination of non-fibrillar proteins during soaking and bating, thus producing soft, supple, and pliable leather[69]. Furthermore, microbial proteases are employed for quick absorption of water thus, reducing soaking time[214]. Proteases from Bacillus sp. with keratinolytic activity have been reported for dehairing properties[29,215217].

    • In the food industry, proteases are usually employed for a variety of purposes, including cheesemaking, baking, the preparation of soya hydrolysates, meat tenderization, etc.[61]. The catalytic function of these enzymes is utilized in the preparation of high nutritional value protein hydrolysate, used as components of dietetic and health products; in infant formulae and clinical nutritional supplements, and as flavoring agents[24,46,218]. However, the bitter taste of protein hydrolysate formed a crucial barrier to its use in food and health care products. Therefore, proteases (carboxypeptidases A) have a high specificity for debittering protein hydrolysates. A key application of protease in the dairy industry is in cheese manufacturing, where the primary role of the enzymes is to hydrolyze specific peptides to generate casein and macropeptides[19,219,220]. In addition, proteases play a significant role in meat tenderization (e.g., beef) since they possess the potential to hydrolyze connective tissue proteins as well as muscle fiber proteins[27,221]. Endo- and exoproteinases are used in the baking industry to modify wheat gluten. The addition of proteases reduces the mixing time, improves extensibility and strength of dough, and results in enhanced loaf volume[19,222]. Proteases are also employed in the processing of soy sauce and soy products and in the enzymatic synthesis of aspartame (sweetening agent)[61,223].

    • Proteases are used in the treatment of waste from various food processing industries and household activities[224]. These enzymes solubilize proteinaceous wastes via a multistep process for the recovery of liquid concentrates or dry solids of nutritional value for fish or livestock[225,226]. This is achieved by initial adsorption of the enzyme on the solid substrates followed by cleavage of polypeptide chain that is loosely bound to the surface. Thereafter, the solubilization of the more compact core occurs at a slower rate, depending on the diffusion of the enzyme surface active sites and core particles[227]. Enzymatic degradation of waste using proteases with keratinolytic activity is an attractive method[228,229]. Among microbial species, some members of the genus Bacillus are regarded as keratinase producers for feather degradation[230233]. Enzymatic treatment of waste feathers from poultry slaughterhouses using protease from Bacillus subtilis has been reported[234]. Pretreatment with NaOH, mechanical disintegration, and enzymatic hydrolysis resulted in complete solubilization of the feathers, releasing a heavy, grayish powder with high protein content that could be used as an additive in feeds, fertilizers, etc. In addition, proteases with keratinolytic activity are used for the degradation of waste material in household refuse, and as a depilatory agent for the removal of hairs in bathtub drains which cause unpleasant odors[235237].

    • The diversity and specificity of proteases are utilized for the development of a broad range of therapeutic agents[223]. The involvement of these biocatalysts in the life cycle of pathogens characterizes them as a possible target for the development of antimicrobial agents against acute diseases[238]. For instance, elastoterase from Bacillus subtilis 316M immobilized on a bandage is used for the treatment of burns, purulent wounds, carbuncles, furuncles, and deep abscesses[239]. In addition, fibrinolytic protease is employed as a thrombolytic agent[240]. Serratiopeptidase, a protease produced by Serratia sp., is the most effective protease for treatment of acute and chronic inflammation and as an antimicrobial agent against acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), hepatitis B and C etc.[241,242]. In addition, serrazime, a proteolytic enzyme from Aspergillus sp. is utilized in dietary supplements as anti-inflammatory; cardiovascular or immune support[243]. Collagenases with alkaline protease activity are used for the preparation of slow-release dosage forms as well as in wound healing, the treatment of sciatica in herniated intervertebral discs, the treatment of retained placenta, and as a pretreatment for enhancing adenovirus-mediated cancer gene therapy[244,245]. Furthermore, lysostaphin, an extracellular protease from Staphylococcus simulans exhibited therapeutic activity against a broad spectrum of infections such as endocarditis, abscesses, septicaemia, and septic emboli, caused by Staphylococcus sp. This is achieved by secreting toxins, which cause puncture of the Staphylococcal cell wall, resulting in cell death[246248]. More so, L-asparaginase from Escherichia coli and Erwinia chrysanthemi is used for the treatment of malignant tumours, lymphoblastic lymphoma, and lymphoblastic leukaemia in children[238,249]. Streptokinases (Streptococcus sp.) and collagenases (Clostridium histolyticum and Aspergillus oryzae) are employed as therapeutic agents against myocardial infection, coronary thrombosis; supplements in the treatment of lytic enzyme deficiency syndromes, burns, and wounds[238]. The cytotoxic nature of several proteases allows the enzymes to be used as efficient antimicrobial agents for clinical purposes[250].

    • Microbial proteases are leading catalysts with a tremendous increase in global demand in the last few decades. They are produced by bacteria, fungi, and yeasts. However, bacterial proteases are mostly preferred due to their high catalytic activity and stability at broad pH and temperature ranges. The production of these biocatalysts is influenced by nutritional and physicochemical parameters. Insolubilization of the purified enzymes in appropriate support materials is a very useful approach for efficient bicatalysis. It enhances the recovery and reuse potential of the enzymes, thus reducing overall costs. The robust versatility and specificity of microbial proteases warrant their employability as green catalysts in the detergent, food, leather, and pharmaceutical industries, as well as in waste management.

      Due to the growing and multi-functional applications of microbial proteases, further discovery and engineering of novel enzymes with robust catalytic efficiency suitable for commercial applications should be carried out through metagenomics, site-directed mutagenesis, or in vitro evolutionary modification of protein primary structures. More research should be carried out on the use of microbial proteases as an alternative to classical antibiotics for the development of novel therapeutic agents against emerging infectious diseases.

      • The financial support of the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa is hereby acknowledged. Opinions expressed and conclusions arrived at, are those of the authors and are not necessarily to be attributed to the NRF.

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      • Copyright: © 2023 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press on behalf of Nanjing Agricultural University. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (1)  Table (4) References (250)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Adetunji AI, Olaitan MO, Erasmus M, Olaniran AO. 2023. Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability. Food Materials Research 3:12 doi: 10.48130/FMR-2023-0012
    Adetunji AI, Olaitan MO, Erasmus M, Olaniran AO. 2023. Microbial proteases: A next generation green catalyst for industrial, environmental and biomedical sustainability. Food Materials Research 3:12 doi: 10.48130/FMR-2023-0012

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return