Effects of Sugar on Carbon Dioxide Production in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Introduction

The procedure of cellular respiration starts off with glycolysis which is the process of separating of glucose. Glycolysis is an anaerobic procedure, which means it tends to be finished with or without the presence of oxygen. At the point when matched with aging, the cell can use glucose without the presence of oxygen. Pyruvate is changed over into acetaldehyde, a procedure that discharges carbon dioxide (CO2) as a side-effect and creates Ethanol. Maturation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae can be utilized in the generation of brew or bread.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

S. cerevisiae has recently demonstrated an inclination to glucose, when looking at the utilization of glucose and fructose. Glucose was reliably processed snappier than fructose when being utilized at the equivalent time. Strains of S. cerevisiae that age utilizing lactose have been evolved. The living beings developed in Guimarães’ investigation devoured lactose at double the rate of strains that hadn’t advanced in their study. In S. cerevisiae the measure of CO2 delivered in a roundabout way estimates the measure of ATP created. The procedures that produces ATP can’t happen until after CO2 has been delivered and discharged.

We hypothesized that the kind of sugar utilized in S. cerevisiae’s utilization would influence the measure of CO2 delivered by the yeast. We anticipated that if the sort of sugar utilized in S. cerevisiae’s utilization would influence the measure of CO2 delivered by the yeast, at that point the yeast that processed glucose would create more CO2 than the yeast that used fructose or lactose.

Methods

Experimental Design

To determine the effects of sugar on Carbon Dioxide production in S. cerevisiae, we measured the production of Carbon Dioxide in S. cerevisiae on a minute by minute basis for five minutes with varying sugar solutions. We conducted this experiment by running six trials by testing glucose, lactose, and fructose solutions with a yeast solution to measure the reaction rate of the yeast to the sugar solutions to detect the production of CO2 in the solution mix.

To start this experiment, we heated up about 700 mL of distilled water and gathered our testing sugars and yeast. We weighed out approximately 5.1 grams of each sugar, Glucose, Lactose, and Fructose and we weighed out approximately 1 gram of yeast. We dissolved the 1 gram of yeast into 100 mL of the heated distilled water. We let the yeast solution sit for 10 minutes for activation purposes. After the yeast activation process, we combined 10 mL of yeast solution with 10 mL of glucose solution into a storage bottle and recorded the CO2 production per minute for five minutes. This solution was our control group. We combined 10 mL of yeast solution with 10 mL of lactose into a storage bottle and recorded the CO2 production per minute for five minutes. We combined 10 mL of yeast and 10 mL of fructose into a storage bottle and recorded the CO2 production per minute for 5 minutes. We repeated the respected steps for each of the sugars and yeast solutions to measure their CO2 production levels five more times to eliminate the possible variations in the data.

Statistical Analysis

We used the Kruskal-Wallis test to present averages of the three groups we tested to show if the groups are significantly different even though the data we collected wasn’t normally-distributed

Results

The type of sugars consumed by S. cerevisiae did not significantly affect the amount of CO2 produced (Kruskal- Wallis test, H= 3.776, p= 0.1514, Figure 1). The average of CO2 produced by Glucose was 133.83 ppm
±
111.68. This average was similar to the average for Fructose of 120.67 ppm
±
96.71. However, lactose had an average of CO2 produced of 79.79 ppm
±
64.29

Figure 1. Effect of the type of carbohydrate on CO2 production in S. Cerevisiae. The error bars represent standard deviation. 

Discussion

The outcomes did not support our speculation that the sort of sugar devoured by S. cerevisiae influences the CO2production (Figure 1) When aged in various arrangements, the yeast used the sugars in comparative rates essentially in light of the fact that it has no other resources. ​

A conceivable mistake that may have happened with our trial is because of test size and time allotment. In light of time and planning imperatives, we were just ready to utilize an example size of 6 for every treatment and inside 5-minute interims. Though different past trials who found huge variety had an enormous example size and watched sugar fixation after set number of hours. This imaginable made our information be increasingly factor and less precise. ​

To see whether our discoveries apply to anaerobic breath, we propose to explore the impact that isomers have on carbon dioxide generation in yeast. Research propose that isomers have a similar concoction recipe anyway have diverse synthetic structures. By contrasting how yeast utilizes sucrose, maltose, and lactose, we can decide how substance structure influences the carbon dioxide generation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Our discoveries are the initial move toward contemplating the importance of sugars in anaerobic breath.

References

1. Berthels, N, et al. “Discrepancy in Glucose and Fructose Utilization during​

           Fermentation by Wine Yeast Strains.” FEMS Yeast Research, vol. 4, no. 7, May​

           2004, pp. 683–689., doi:10.1016/j.femsyr.2004.02.005.​

2.  Cason, T., and Reid, G. 1987. On the differing rates of fructose and glucose  ​

           utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Journal of the institute of   brewing,​

           93 (1):23-25. ​

3. D’ Amore, T., Russell, I., and Stewart, G. 1989. Sugar utilization by yeast during​

           fermentation. Journal of Industrial Microbiology, 4 (4): 315-324. ​

4. Guimaraes, P. M. R., et al. “Adaptive Evolution of a Lactose-Consuming​

            Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Recombinant.” Applied and Environmental​

       Microbiology, vol. 74, no. 6, 1 Feb. 2008, pp. 1748–1756., ​

5. Morris J., Hartl, D., Knoll, A., Lue, R., Michael, M. (2016) How Life Works, 2nd​

       Edition. NewYork, NY: Macmillan Learning.