Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth01:29

Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth

1.9K
Microbial growth control refers to various methods employed to inhibit, reduce, or eliminate microorganisms to ensure safety and hygiene across different settings. These methods are categorized based on the target environment and the level of microbial control required.Biocides are versatile agents designed to control microorganisms by either inhibiting their growth or outright killing them. These agents work through various physical, chemical, mechanical, or biological mechanisms. The...
1.9K
Physical Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth: Radiation and Filtration01:26

Physical Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth: Radiation and Filtration

1.3K
Radiation and filtration are essential tools for microbial control, targeting microorganisms through distinct mechanisms. Radiation eliminates microbes by damaging their DNA, either killing them or inhibiting their growth. Based on wavelength, radiation is classified into two types: nonionizing and ionizing radiation.Non-ionizing radiation, such as UV radiation (200–400 nm), is absorbed by DNA, causing defects that effectively disinfect surfaces, air, and water, including safety cabinets.
1.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same authorSame journal

Comparative Transcriptomic Profiling Reveals Differences in Initiation of Antiviral Response in Low rAAV Producing HEK293 Suspension Cells.

Biotechnology journal·2026
Same author

Comparative Analysis of rAAV Production from Plasmid-Encoded Versus Chromosomally Integrated rAAV Transgene in HEK293 Cells.

International journal of molecular sciences·2026
Same author

Comparative Analysis of HEK293 Genomic Variability.

Biotechnology and bioengineering·2025
Same author

Comprehensive Comparison of Baculoviral and Plasmid Gene Delivery in Mammalian Cells.

Viruses·2024
Same author

Explainable deep learning enhances robust and reliable real-time monitoring of a chromatographic protein A capture step.

Biotechnology journal·2024
Same author

Sensors and chemometrics in downstream processing.

Biotechnology and bioengineering·2023

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 28, 2026

Microfluidic Tools for Probing Fungal-Microbial Interactions at the Cellular Level
08:19

Microfluidic Tools for Probing Fungal-Microbial Interactions at the Cellular Level

Published on: June 23, 2022

4.3K

Microscale disruption of microorganisms for parallelized process development.

Cornelia Walther1,2, Astrid Dürauer1

  • 1Department of Biotechnology, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Biotechnology Journal
|June 21, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Microbial biopharmaceutical production relies on efficient cell disruption. Bead milling is the most comparable microscale method to large-scale high-pressure homogenization for automated process development in microbial hosts.

Keywords:
BacteriaCell disintegrationMicrobialsScale down

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Microbial Control and Monitoring Strategies for Cleanroom Environments and Cellular Therapies
09:30

Author Spotlight: Microbial Control and Monitoring Strategies for Cleanroom Environments and Cellular Therapies

Published on: March 17, 2023

4.6K
Microfluidic Picoliter Bioreactor for Microbial Single-cell Analysis: Fabrication, System Setup, and Operation
12:04

Microfluidic Picoliter Bioreactor for Microbial Single-cell Analysis: Fabrication, System Setup, and Operation

Published on: December 6, 2013

13.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 28, 2026

Microfluidic Tools for Probing Fungal-Microbial Interactions at the Cellular Level
08:19

Microfluidic Tools for Probing Fungal-Microbial Interactions at the Cellular Level

Published on: June 23, 2022

4.3K
Author Spotlight: Microbial Control and Monitoring Strategies for Cleanroom Environments and Cellular Therapies
09:30

Author Spotlight: Microbial Control and Monitoring Strategies for Cleanroom Environments and Cellular Therapies

Published on: March 17, 2023

4.6K
Microfluidic Picoliter Bioreactor for Microbial Single-cell Analysis: Fabrication, System Setup, and Operation
12:04

Microfluidic Picoliter Bioreactor for Microbial Single-cell Analysis: Fabrication, System Setup, and Operation

Published on: December 6, 2013

13.0K

Area of Science:

  • Biotechnology
  • Bioprocess Engineering
  • Microbial Fermentation

Background:

  • Escherichia coli, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and Pichia pastoris are key microbial hosts for biopharmaceutical production, with 40% of protein drugs approved between 2010-2014 produced in these systems.
  • Overexpressed products in E. coli and S. cerevisiae are often located in the cytosol or periplasm, necessitating efficient cell disruption for high recovery.
  • Microscale process development is crucial for accelerating time-to-market in biopharmaceutical development.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review and evaluate microscale cell disruption methods suitable for biopharmaceutical process development.
  • To assess the suitability of microscale methods for automation, parallelization, and miniaturization at scales as low as 200 µL.
  • To compare the efficacy of microscale methods against industry-standard high-pressure homogenization for scale-down considerations.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review of microscale cell disruption techniques for microbial hosts.
  • Analysis of methods based on scalability, automation potential, and comparability to high-pressure homogenization.
  • Consideration of applications for protein overexpression in E. coli and yeast, as well as alternative hosts like microalgae.

Main Results:

  • High-pressure homogenization is the industry standard for large-scale cell disruption but is not practical at microscale.
  • Bead milling emerged as the most comparable microscale method to large-scale high-pressure homogenization.
  • The review considered automation, parallelization, and miniaturization strategies for microscale cell disruption.

Conclusions:

  • Bead milling is the most suitable microscale technique for automated process development in microbial hosts, offering comparability to high-pressure homogenization.
  • This method is advantageous for biopharmaceutical production, particularly for protein overexpression in E. coli and yeast.
  • The suitability of bead milling extends to alternative products and hosts, excluding plasmid DNA (pDNA) production.