Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2026 Apr 29;49(6):1579–1587. doi: 10.1007/s00449-026-03339-1

Application of magnetic fields to the microalgal cultivation of Nannochloropsis oceanica

Danielle Barros Urrutia 1, Bruno Roswag Machado 1, Pedro Senger de Souza 3, Carlos Rafael Borges Mendes 2,3, Fabio Roselet 4, Lucielen Oliveira Santos 1,✉
PMCID: PMC13328126  PMID: 42053644

Abstract

Microalgae are microorganisms that exhibit variations in their biochemical structures which depend on the species and cultivation conditions. Microalgae produce a variety of biomolecules, including proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, and pigments, the levels of which depend on the species and cultivation conditions. Species that belong to genus Nannochloropsis, mainly Nannochloropsis oceanica, have been widely used in aquaculture. They are promising sources of biofuels and bioproducts because they produce high contents of proteins and lipids. This study aimed at evaluating the effect of 30 mT magnetic fields (MF) applied to cultivation of N. oceanica for different exposure periods (1 h d−1 and 24 h d−1) and photoperiods (12L:12D or 24L). Although no significant differences were observed in the growth rate, the combination of MF applied for 1 h d−1 and continuous light (24L) resulted in the highest biomass concentration and lipid accumulation (46.45%). Carbohydrate content ranged from 23.70 to 36.73%, and protein content from 14.80 to 36.43%, indicating that prolonged exposures may reduce proteins. The pigments showed remarkably high levels, especially violaxanthin (0.07 mg g−1), vaucheriaxanthin (0.11 mg g−1), and chlorophyll a (0.19 mg g−1), indicating enhancement of the xanthophyll metabolic pathway and photosynthetic stability. The biomass also exhibited moderate antioxidant activity (16—24%) in the ABTS and DPPH assays. Thus, the study showed that N. oceanica can grow under different conditions but stands out with 1 h d−1 of MF under continuous light as the most promising for enhancing biomass and lipids, with applications in biofuels, food, pharmaceuticals, and nutraceuticals.

Keywords: Biomass, Microalgae, Nannochloropsis, Photoperiod

Introduction

Microalgae are unicellular photosynthetic microorganisms which grow under light and CO2 and convert them, together with water and nutrients, into biomass that is rich in carbohydrates, proteins, lipids and pigments [1]. They may be grown both outdoors and indoors (controlled growth conditions). Since there is a broad diversity of microalgae, many species have already been registered. The database AlgaeBase includes 50,589 species of living algae and 8,081 species of fossil ones, totaling about 61,145 species [2].

Genus Nannochloropsis is one that has drawn more interest due to its high production of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), which has been used in aquaculture and is relevant to human nutrition [3]. Species Nannochloropsis oceanica, which is found in coastal waters and in estuaries, stands out because it can adapt to saline variations, has high productivity and grow in f/2 media [4]. It not only tolerates different osmotic conditions and variations in nutrients and light intensities, fast growth and high lipid content (16–60%) [2–4].

Some studies have shown that photoperiods influence biomass and biomolecule production. Continuous lighting for 24 h can substantially increase biomass productivity, chlorophyll, proteins and carbohydrates, depending on the species and the cultivation system. Combinations of LEDs and thermal stress have already reached 0.75 g L−1 biomass and lipid content of 57.6%. A 12L/12D photoperiod favors the synthesis of polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as EPA [8–10].

N. oceanica has essential fatty acids, vitamins, proteins, carbohydrates and pigments, such as astaxanthin, canthaxanthin, zeaxanthin and chlorophyll [3, 5–11]. To increase their production, magnetic field (MF) application has become a promising technique. Exposure to MF can interact with biological systems, although the effects vary widely depending on the intensity of the field and duration of exposure. Some studies have shown that their use may increase biomass production, but their effects, which may be positive, null or even inhibitory, depend on the application conditions [12, 13]. Despite some advances, there are no studies of MF application to N. oceanica cultivation that consider both the growth and the induction of biomolecule synthesis.

Therefore, this study aims at investigating MF application to N. oceanica under different conditions and photoperiods to optimize production of biomass and compounds of biotechnological interest.

Material and methods

Microorganisms, cultivation media and conditions of the inoculum

Microalga N. oceanica NANN OCEA-1 was provided by AlgaSul, a company in Rio Grande, RS, Brazil. The medium employed was f/2, as described by Andersen [14], containing 75 mg NaNO3, 5 mg Na2HPO4.H2O; 3.15 mg FeCl3.6H2O; 4.36 mg C10H14N2O8Na2.2H2O; 9.8 µg CuSO4.5H2O; 22 µg ZnSO4.7H2O; 10 µg CoCl2.6H2O; 180 µg MnCl2.4H2O; 6.3 µg Na2MoO4.2H2O; 100 µg C12H17ClN4OS.HCl; 0.5 µg C63H88CoN14O14P and 0.5 µg C10H16N2O3S per liter of saline water (28 g L−1). To prepare the inoculum, N. oceanica was kept in 250-mL Erlenmeyer flask with usable volume of 100 mL, at 25 °C, light incidence of 93 µmol m−2 s−1, photoperiod of 12L:12D, pH between 7–8 and salinity equal to 28 g L−1. No MF was applied on inoculum.

Cultivation conditions

Cultivation was carried out in 1-L Erlenmeyer flasks with usable volume of 800 mL and kept at 25 ºC in an incubation chamber (ELETROlab EL202/3, Brazil) and agitation by aeration at 1.5 vvm, injecting sterile air through a sterilized glass wool filter. Two photoperiods were evaluated: 12L:12D for 15 d and 24L for 15 d with luminosity of 93 μmol photons m−2 s−1. Cultivation started at optical density (OD) of 0.1 measured at 750 nm, which corresponded to 1 × 106 cells mL−1.

MF application to N. oceanica cultivation

Magnetic field (MF) were applied during the cultivation of N. oceanica by placing ferrite magnets (80 × 80 × 10 mm), with an average intensity of 30 mT, under the Erlenmeyer flasks. The average intensity of the MF inside the flasks was determined by taking at least 50 measurements with a Gaussmeter (model TLMP-HALL-05kT0, Brazil) to ensure greater spatial representativeness of the applied MF. Influence of length of MF application was evaluated throughout the whole cultivation period (24 h d−1) and for 1 h d−1. The control cultivation was also conducted in these conditions, but there was no MF application. A diagram of the experimental setup for the MF application can be seen in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Schematic representation of magnetic field (MF) application during N. oceanica cultivation

Determination of pH and biomass concentration

Biomass concentration was quantified by a spectrophotometer (Visible spectrophotometer, V5000, China) at OD of 750 nm. It was calculated with the use of a standard curve (y (absorbance) = 2.5075 × (biomass concentration, g L−1) + 0.0595; R2 = 0.99), which related it to absorbance [21]. The pH determination was carried out in the cultivation supernatant by a digital pH meter (Quimis, Q400MT, Brazil).

For these analyses, 6 mL of samples were taken every day. This reduced the volume of the culture slightly throughout the experiment, but the variation remained within the acceptable margin of up to 20%. For collection, the aeration hoses were temporarily sealed to prevent contamination. Erlenmeyer flask was then taken close to the Bunsen burner to maintain a more sterile environment during the procedure, and there the 6 mL sample was taken using previously sterilized material. The entire process took a maximum of about 5 min. After that, the Erlenmeyer flasks returned to the aeration system inside the incubation chamber (ELETROlab EL202/3, Brazil), resuming normal experimental conditions.

Growth parameters

The maximum specific growth rate (µmax, d−1) was calculated by linear regression in the logarithmic growth rate for each experiment, obtained from the plotted curve ln Xt versus t (d). The doubling/generation time (tg) was determined in the exponential growth cycle according to the equation (tg = ln (2)/μmax d−1).

Recovery of biomass

At the end of cultivation (192 h), the entire volume of the culture medium containing the biomass was centrifuged (9690 × g; 20 °C; 20 min). The biomass was then washed in a 0.5 mol L−1 ammonium formate solution and centrifuged again. (9690 × g; 20 °C; 10 min) to enable salts to be removed. Afterwards, it was frozen at −80 °C for 48 h and lyophilized (−55 °C; 50 mmHg; 48 h).

Biochemical composition of biomass

Lyophilized biomass was subject to determinations of moisture, proteins, carbohydrates, lipids and ashes. To determine carbohydrates and proteins, 10 mg biomass and 20 mL distilled water were sonicated (500 W; 20 kHz; 5 min) in an ice bath. Carbohydrates (%) were determined by the Dubois method [15]; absorbance was measured at 488 nm and a standard curve for glucose was performed. Proteins (%) were determined by the method proposed by Lowry et al. [16]; absorbance was measured at 750 nm and a standard curve for bovine serum albumin was performed.

Lipids (%) were extracted in agreement with Halim et al. [17] filtration (Whatman no. 1) and evaporation of the solvent. Moisture and ashes were determined at 105 °C and 550 °C for 3 h, respectively.

Determination of pigment concentration

Pigment composition was determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), in agreement with Faé et al. [18]. The pigments were extracted from 50 mg freeze-dried biomass. Extraction was carried out with 3 mL buffered methanol 95% (2% ammonium acetate) containing 0.05 mg L−1 trans-β-Apo-8′-carotenal, followed by sonication in an ice bath for 5 min, incubation at −20 ºC for 1 h and centrifugation at 1.100 × g and 3 ºC for 5 min. The supernatant was filtered and mixed with 400 µL Milli-Q water before injection (1,000 µL) into the chromatographer (HPLC) with a monomeric C8 column and a pyridine mobile phase. Identification of pigments was based on absorption spectra and on retention times detected by a photodiode detector (Shimadzu SPDM20A, Japan).

Determination of antimicrobial activity

Antimicrobial activity of extracts from N. oceanica biomass was evaluated against strains of Acinetobacter baumannii (ATCC 19606), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 15442), Vibrio coralliilyticus (isolate) and Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 12598), in agreement with protocol M07-A10 (CLSI, 2015). Biomass extracts at different concentrations (0.006–0.8 mg mL−1) were prepared in Mueller Hinton broth and inoculated with 5 × 105 CFU mL−1. After incubation at 37 °C for 24 h, bacterial viability was determined by resazurin. Negative and positive controls were included while ceftazidime, ciprofloxacin and amikacin were the standards. All assays were carried out in triplicate.

Determination of antioxidant activity

Determination of antioxidant activity was carried out in agreement with Lichtenthaler [19], with the use of methanolic extracts (25 mg lyophilized biomass in 10 mL methanol 99%, kept at −4 ºC for 24 h). Determination of scavenging of both radicals 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) and 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic) (ABTS) were conducted as proposed by Rufino et al. [20] In the DPPH assay, 0.1 mL extract (2.5 mg mL−1) was added to 3.9 mL DPPH (0.06 mmol L−1), kept in the dark for 60 min and read at 517 nm. Regarding ABTS, the radical cation was generated by the reaction between ABTS (7 mmol L−1) and potassium persulfate (140 mM) and diluted to absorbance of 0.70 ± 0.05 at 734 nm. Thirty μL extract was added to 3.0 mL solution and read after 6 min. Results were expressed as μmol Trolox g−1 of the sample.

Statistical analysis

Responses of cultivation were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA, one-way), followed by the Tukey’s test and the Student’s t-test to determine antioxidant activity, at 95% confidence level (p < 0.05). All cultures and analytical measurements were performed in triplicate.

Results and discussion

Influence of MF on biomass growth and pH

N. oceanica exhibited growth in all conditions under investigation, as shown in Fig. 2. All cultures ended their exponential phase on the 15th day and reached maximum concentrations of biomass, like the ones described by Guerra et al. [21], who reported about 2.0 g L−1 after 15 days.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Biomass concentrations in N. oceanica cultures under 12L/12D/dark photoperiod (A) and 24L photoperiod (B) with MF application of 30 mT and control assays

In the 12L/12D photoperiod (Fig. 2A), MF application of 30 mT, either for 1 h d−1 or 24 h d−1, did not result in significant statistical differences by comparison with the control. However, in continuous photoperiod (24L; Fig. 2B), there was high increase in biomass concentration, i. e., 62%, when application lasted 24 h on the field under 24L photoperiod, and 91%, when application lasted 1 h d−1 under 24L photoperiod. In all cases, the 15th day of cultivation was considered.

The highest biomass concentration was found when MF application lasted 1 h d−1 – 24L, followed by the control – 24-h light, and then MF application 24 h d−1 – 24L. Finally, in 12L/12D cultures (with and without any MF) (Fig. 3). This behavior is aligned with Menestrino et al. [22], who explained that MF application at the beginning of the light cycle coincides with the metabolic adjustment of cells, thus, favoring the synthesis of co-factors that are essential to photosynthesis, the activation of the transport system of electrons and the assimilation of metallic nutrients. Besides, effects of MF remain even after the exhibition, potentializing the use of continuous light and keeping the rate of cell growth high.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Maximum biomass concentrations of cultures (15 days) of N. oceanica under 12L/12D photoperiod and 24L with MF application of 30 mT. Different lowercase letters show significant difference (p < 0.05) among all assays while different uppercase letters show significant differences (p < 0.05) among equal photoperiod conditions

Growth kinetic parameters (Table 1) did not exhibit significant differences among treatments: µmax ranged between 0.085 ± 0.01 and 0.137 ± 0.05 d−1 while Tg ranged from 5.51 ± 1.86 to 8.24 ± 1.36 d. These values agree with the ones reported by Guerra et al. [21] (0.129 ± 0.020 d−1) but are lower than the ones reached by Khosravinia et al. [23] (0.25 ± 0.00 d−1). It is related to methodological differences, mainly regarding light intensity and length of cultivation.

Table 1.

Growth parameters of N. oceanica under different photoperiods and MF application of 30 mT and control assays

Photoperiod MF µmax Tg
(h d−1) (d−1) (d)
12L/12D 0 0.137 ± 0.05Aa 5.514 ± 1.86Aa
1 0.130 ± 0.00Aa 5.324 ± 0.26Aa
24 0.117 ± 0.00Aa 5.919 ± 0.45Aa
24L 0 0.085 ± 0.01Aa 8.249 ± 1.36Aa
1 0.115 ± 0.01Aa 6.100 ± 0.84Aa
24 0.119 ± 0.01Aa 5.896 ± 0.97Aa

*Generation time (Tg), maximum rate of specific growth (µmax). Equal and lowercase letters mean that there is no significant difference among cultures while equal and uppercase letters on a certain column show that there is no significant difference in the same photoperiod, at 95% confidence level (p < 0.05)

In cultures, pH (Fig. 4) ranged between 7.0 and 8.2 throughout the 15-day experiment. It is the ideal pH range for N. oceanica [24]. In the 12L/12D photoperiod (Fig. 4B), the initial pH (8.0) had a slight decrease up to 7.5 at the end of cultivation. In the 24L photoperiod (Fig. 4A), oscillations were from 7.5 to 8.0. The stability shows the balance between CO₂ assimilation and photosynthetic activity [25].

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Behavior of pH in N. oceanica cultures under 24 h light (A) and 12 h light/dark photoperiod (B) with MF application of 30 mT and control assays

Biomass characterization

Table 2 shows the proximate composition of biomass reached in different conditions. Carbohydrate content ranged between 23.70% and 36.73%. The highest values of carbohydrate content were achieved when MF were applied for 24 h d−1 – 12L/12D (36.73%) and the lowest ones when MF were applied for 1 h d−1 – 12L/12D (23.70%) and MF applied for 1 h d−1 – 24L (24.39%). These findings agree with the ones reported by Guerra et al. [21] and Senousy et al.[26], whose results ranged from 21 to 42% when N. oceanica grew in f/2 medium.

Table 2.

Characterization of the biomass produced by N. oceanica under 12 h light/dark and 24 h light photoperiods with MF application of 30 mT (1 h d−1 or 24 h d−1) and control assays 

Photoperiod MF (h d−1) Carbohydrates (%, w w−1) Proteins (%, w w−1) Lipids (%, w w−1) Ashes (%, w w−1)
12L/12D 0 31.05 ± 1.93ab 31.58 ± 1.43ab 23.68 ± 0.94c 12.56 ± 2.11b
1 23.70 ± 2.95c 32.23 ± 6.66ab 22.63 ± 1.14c 21.04 ± 2.99a
24 36.73 ± 1.66a 14.80 ± 1.95c 31.53 ± 5.65b 15.26 ± 2.53b
24L 0 33.95 ± 1.45ab 36.43 ± 0.38a 23.90 ± 1.49c 4.52 ± 0.60c
1 24.39 ± 3.07c 23.47 ± 4.65ac 46.45 ± 6.04ª 4.53 ± 0.47c
24 30.47 ± 0.35b 29.48 ± 0.95ab 36.48 ± 1.91b 2.82 ± 0.66c

*Different letters on a column mean that the cultures are statistically equal; different letters on a column represent statistical difference at 95% confidence level

From a metabolic perspective, carbohydrates represent the primary photosynthetic products in microalgae and act as central carbon precursors for the synthesis of lipids and proteins [27, 28]. Through glycolysis and the tricarboxylic acid cycle, carbohydrates are oxidized and decreasing, generating acetyl-CoA and reducing equivalents that support fatty acid biosynthesis [29]. In parallel, carbon skeletons derived from carbohydrate metabolism are aminated and transaminated to form amino acids, which are subsequently polymerized into proteins [28]. Thus, lipid and protein accumulation are closely linked to carbohydrate turnover and respiratory activity [27, 30].

Protein contents ranged from 14.80% (MF 24 h – 12L/12D) to 36.43% (C – 24L). These values are in the range described by Ashour et al. [31] (14.46%) and Uthaiah et al. [32] (46.78%). The reduction in protein content under prolonged MF exposure (24L – 12L/12D) may indicate a shift in nitrogen assimilation or in the availability of carbon skeletons required for amino acid biosynthesis, possibly due to alterations in carbohydrate conversion dynamics.

Regarding lipids, the highest content was found in MF 1 h d-1 – 24L (46.45%), followed by MF 24 h d−1 – 24L (36.48%) and MF 24 h d – 12L/12D (31.53%). The increase under intermittent MF and continuous light suggests moderate stress induction which encourages lipid accumulation [33]. Considering that lipid biosynthesis depends on acetyl-CoA derived from carbohydrate catabolism, the elevated lipid content under intermittent MF may reflect a redistribution of carbon flux from carbohydrate storage toward fatty acid synthesis [29, 30]. Conversely, prolonged MF exposure associated with higher carbohydrate levels may indicate partial restriction of carbohydrate conversion, thereby limiting its channeling into lipid and protein biosynthesis [30].

Ash contents ranged between 2.82% (MF 24 h – 24L) and 21.04% (MF 1 h – 12L/12D). The high values reached in alternate photoperiods show that there was high mineral absorption, as observed by Souza et al. [34] and Kato et al. [35]. These results show that both the photoperiod and the regime of MF application influence carbon and energy allocation in cells, thus, guiding the metabolism to either lipid or carbohydrate accumulation, depending on the intensity and length of magnetic exposure.

Overall, the combined effects of photoperiod and MF regime appear to modulate carbon partitioning and metabolic flux distribution in the cells. The MF may interfere with enzymatic activity, electron transport processes, or redox balance [36, 37], thereby affecting carbohydrate utilization and its subsequent conversion into lipids and proteins [29]. This metabolic interplay helps explain the observed variations in macromolecular composition among treatments.

Pigment content

The main pigments identified in Nannochloropsis oceanica at the end of 192 h of cultivation were chlorophyll-a, vaucheriaxanthin, violaxanthin, zeaxanthin, antheraxanthin, and β-carotene (Table 3).

Table 3.

Pigment content of N. oceanica under different light conditions and MF application of 30 mT

Assays Pigment content (mg g−1)*
Chlorophyll a Vaucheriaxanthin Violaxanthin Zeaxanthin Antheraxanthin β-Carotene
Control—12L/12D 0.13 ± 0.04a,b,c 0.10 ±  < 0.01a,b 0.06 ± 0.02a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0040 ± 0.0010a 0.0004 ± 0.0002b
MF 24 h d−1—12L/12D 0.20 ± 0.03a 0.11 ±  < 0.01a 0.07 ± 0.05a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0036 ± 0.0003a 0.0017 ± 0.0005a
MF 1 h d−1—12L/12D 0.19 ± 0.09a,b 0.08 ±  < 0.01a,b 0.04 ± 0.02a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0034 ± 0.0021a 0.0004 ± 0.0001b
Control—24L 0.06 ± 0.03b,c 0.05 ±  < 0.01b 0.03 ± 0.01a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0029 ± 0.0026a 0.0001 ± 0.0002b
MF 24 h d−1—24L 0.05 ± 0.02c 0.06 ±  < 0.01a,b 0.05 ±  < 0.01a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0022 ± 0.0004a 0.0003 ± 0.0002b
MF 1 h d−1—24L 0.06 ± 0.02b,c 0.06 ±  < 0.01a,b 0.06 ± 0.02a 0.01 ±  < 0.01a 0.0026 ± 0.0008a 0.0002 ± 0.0001b

*Different letters in the same column represent significant difference at a 95% confidence level (p < 0.05) between the assays

Chlorophyll-a contents ranged from 0.05 ± 0.02 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1 – 24L) to 0.20 ± 0.03 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1 – 12L/12D). The highest values were observed under the photoperiod condition (12L/12D) when MF were applied for 24 h d−1, suggesting that the combination of MF exposure and light/dark cycling may stimulate chlorophyll biosynthesis. Similarly, Bauer et al. (2017) obtained a 39.9% increase in chlorophyll-a production by the microalga Chlorella kessleri LEB 113 when they applied 60 mT for 1 h d−1 with a 12L/12D photoperiod. Deamici et al. (2018) demonstrated a 137.7% increase in chlorophyll-a content, of Spirulina sp. LEB 18, with the application of 25 mT 24 h d−1 and a 12L/12D photoperiod.

Violaxanthin contents ranged from 0.03 ± 0.01 mg g−1 (Control – 24L) to 0.07 ± 0.05 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1 – 12L/12D), with no significant differences among treatments (p > 0.05). Similarly, Zeaxanthin contents remained relatively constant across treatments, with values around 0.01 ±  < 0.01 mg g−1. Vaucheriaxanthin varied between 0.05 ±  < 0.01 mg g−1 (Control – 24L) and 0.11 ±  < 0.01 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1—12L/12D. Antheraxanthin concentrations ranged from 0.0022 ± 0.0004 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1 – 24L) to 0.0040 ± 0.0010 mg g−1 (Control – 12L/12D, with no significant differences observed among the assays (p > 0.05).

β-Carotene contents were the lowest among the pigments analyzed, ranging from 0.0001 ± 0.0002 mg g−1 (Control – 24L) to 0.0017 ± 0.0005 mg g−1 (MF 24 h d−1 – 12L/12D). Although most treatments did not differ significantly, the MF 24 h d−1 – 12L/12D condition resulted in the highest β-carotene accumulation.

Overall, pigment accumulation tended to be higher under the 12L/12D photoperiod, particularly when MF were applied continuously (24 h d−1), indicating a possible interaction between MF exposure and photoperiod in regulating carotenoid and chlorophyll biosynthesis in N. oceanica.

Antimicrobial activity

Evaluation of antimicrobial activity in Nannochloropsis oceanica is relevant due to the increasing interest in microalgae as sources of bioactive compounds with potential applications in animal production [38] and aquaculture industries [39]. This species is known to produce bioactive metabolites, particularly phenolic compounds, fatty acids and other lipophilic compounds, which have been associated with antimicrobial activity in microalgae [40]. Therefore, assessing the antimicrobial potential of its biomass contributes to exploring its biotechnological value and possible future applications.

Biomass produced by N. oceanica did not exhibit significant antimicrobial activity against Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Vibrio coralliilyticus and Staphylococcus aureus. The absence of effect is attributed to the high dilution of the sample and to the use of biomass, instead of the supernatant, where bioactive extracellular extracts usually accumulate [41]. However, previous studies reported that methanolic extracts of this species exhibit moderate antimicrobial activity against S. aureus and E. coli [42].

Antioxidant activity

Assays ABTS⁺ and DPPH (Table 4) indicated moderate antioxidant activity. Inhibition was 20.2 ± 3.14% and 22.3 ± 0.49% (MF 1 h d−1 – 12L/12D) and 16.0 ± 6.86% and 23.8 ± 0.73% (MF 1 h d−1 – 24L), respectively. There was no significant difference among photoperiods (p < 0.05). These results agree with the ones reported by Conde et al. [43], who observed about 20% inhibition of radicals and confirmed the presence of antioxidant compounds in N. oceanica.

Table 4.

ABTS and DPPH free radical scavenging activity of N. oceanica cultivated under a 30 mT (1 h d−1) under two photoperiod regimes: 24L and 12L/12D

Assays DPPH (%) ABTS+ (%)
MF 1 h d−1 – 12L/12D 20.2 ± 3.14a 22.3 ± 0.49a
MF 1 h d−1 – 24L 16.0 ± 6.86a 23.8 ± 0.73a

*Equal letters on a certain column show that there was no statistical difference by the t-test at 95% confidence level (p < 0.05)

Conclusion

Application of 30 mT (MF) modulated the biochemical composition of Nannochloropsis oceanica without significantly affecting growth rate. However, the condition MF 1 h d−1 under continuous light (24L) resulted in the highest biomass concentration and lipid accumulation (46.45%), indicating improved carbon allocation toward lipid biosynthesis. Pigment accumulation, particularly chlorophyll a, violaxanthin, and vaucheriaxanthin, was also supported under this condition. Overall, short-term MF exposure combined with continuous illumination appears to be the most favorable strategy to enhance biomass productivity and the production of lipids and high-value pigments in N. oceanica.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the National Counsel for Technological and Scientific Development—CAPES (Proc. 312486/2022-7) for a research fellowship and the Master’s and Doctoral Academic Program for Innovation MAI/DAI from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq.

Author contribution

DBU: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing, Reviewing, and Editing—original draft. BRM: Writing, Reviewing, and Editing—original draft; PSS: Methodology, Investigation; Reviewing, and Editing—original draft. CRBM: Methodology, Investigation; Reviewing, and Editing—original draft; FR: Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing, Reviewing—original draft. LOS: Project administration, Supervision, Writing, Reviewing, and Editing—original draft.

Funding

The Article Processing Charge (APC) for the publication of this research was funded by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) (ROR identifier: 00x0ma614). This study was financed in part by the National Counsel for Technological and Scientific Development - CAPES (Finance Code 001), National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq, and the startup AlgaSul Biotecnologia de Microalgas.

Data availability

All data generated and analyzed by this study are included in this manuscript (and in its supplementary material). The data can be made available.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This original manuscript does not report any study carried out either with humans or with animals.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Sun Z, Bo C, Cao S, Sun L (2025) Enhancing CO2 fixation in microalgal systems: mechanistic insights and bioreactor strategies. Mar Drugs 23:113. 10.3390/md23030113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Chen X, Khatiwada JR, Chio C et al (2024) Low-cost cultivation of Nannochloropsis oceanica in newly designed photobioreactors and its productivity trends in semi-continuous cultivation under inland outdoor conditions. Bioresour Technol 402:130829. 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.130829 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Gundersen E, Jakobsen J, Holdt SL, Jacobsen C (2024) Nannochloropsis oceanica as a source of bioactive compounds: mapping the effects of cultivation conditions on biomass productivity and composition using response surface methodology. Mar Drugs 22:505. 10.3390/md22110505 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ye Y, Liu M, Yu L et al (2024) Nannochloropsis as an emerging algal chassis for light-driven synthesis of lipids and high-value products. Mar Drugs 22:54. 10.3390/md22020054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ferrer-Ledo N, Stegemüller L, Janssen M et al (2023) Growth and fatty acid distribution over lipid classes in Nannochloropsis oceanica acclimated to different temperatures. Front Plant Sci 14:1078998. 10.3389/fpls.2023.1078998 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Kiani H, Ma Q, Xiao M et al (2024) Growth and fatty acid profile of Nannochloropsis oceanica cultivated on nano-filtered whey permeate. J Appl Phycol 36:2503–2516. 10.1007/s10811-024-03287-x [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Navalho S, Ferrer-Ledo N, Barbosa MJ, Varela J (2025) Nannochloropsis lipids and polyunsaturated fatty acids: potential applications and strain improvement. Mar Drugs 23:128. 10.3390/md23030128 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Osorio H, Jara C, Fuenzalida K et al (2019) High-efficiency nuclear transformation of the microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica using Tn5 transposome for the generation of altered lipid accumulation phenotypes. Biotechnol Biofuels 12:134. 10.1186/s13068-019-1475-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ljubic A, Jacobsen C, Holdt SL, Jakobsen J (2020) Microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica as a future new natural source of vitamin D3. Food Chem 320:126627. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.126627 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Le TPL, Samarathunga J, Gabard M et al (2025) Comparison of extraction methods to obtain high-purity protein concentrate from green microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica. Sustain Food Technol 3:549–558. 10.1039/D4FB00387J [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Liu M, Zheng J, Yu L et al (2024) Engineering Nannochloropsis oceanica for concurrent production of canthaxanthin and eicosapentaenoic acid. Bioresour Technol 413:131525. 10.1016/j.biortech.2024.131525 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.de Carvalho MP, de Morais MG, Santos LO et al (2025) Production of biomass and biomolecules in Limnospira indica PCC 8005 cultivation under magnetic fields and polymeric nanofibers. J Biotechnol 405:48–56. 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2025.05.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Santos LO, Silva PGP, Machado BR et al (2022) Update on the application of magnetic fields to microalgal cultures. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 38:211. 10.1007/s11274-022-03398-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Andersen RA (2005) Algal Culturing Techniques, 1st edn. Academic Press, Burlington, MA [Google Scholar]
  • 15.DuBois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK et al (1956) Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal Chem 28:350–356 [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lowry O, Rosebrough AF, Randall R (1951) Protein measurement with the Folin-Phenol reagent. J Biol Chen 193:265–275. 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Halim R, Danquah MK, Webley PA (2012) Extraction of oil from microalgae for biodiesel production: A review. Biotechnol Adv 30:709–732. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2012.01.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Faé Neto WA, Borges Mendes CR, Abreu PC (2018) Carotenoid production by the marine microalgae Nannochloropsis oculata in different low-cost culture media. Aquac Res 49:2527–2535. 10.1111/are.13715 [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lichtenthaler HK (1987) Chlorophylls and carotenoids: pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. In Methods in enzymology 148:350–382. 10.1016/0076-6879(87)48036-1 [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Rufino M, Alves RE, Brito ES, et al (2007) Metodologia científica: determinação da atividade antioxidante total em frutas pela captura do radical livre ABTSº+. Embrapa Agroindústria Tropical. Comunicado Técnico. Available in: https://agris.fao.org/search/en/providers/122419/records/647355ea2c1d629bc97a1200
  • 21.Guerra I, Pereira H, Costa M et al (2021) Operation regimes: A comparison based on Nannochloropsis oceanica biomass and lipid productivity. Energies 14:1542. 10.3390/en14061542 [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Costa Menestrino B, Sala L, Costa JAV et al (2021) Magnetic fields exhibit a positive impact on lipid and biomass yield during phototrophic cultivation of Spirulina sp.. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 44:2087–2097. 10.1007/s00449-021-02585-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Khosravinia S, Malekzadeh-Shafaroudi S, Bagheri A et al (2023) Bioprospecting of ten microalgae species isolated from saline water lake for evaluation of the biodiesel production. Bioenergy Res 17:1090–1103. 10.1007/s12155-023-10707-2 [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Rao M, Zou X, Ye J et al (2022) Light conditions determine optimal CO2 concentrations for Nannochloropsis oceanica growth with carbon fixation. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 10:8799–8814. 10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c01179 [Google Scholar]
  • 25.González-Camejo J, Robles A, Seco A et al (2020) On-line monitoring of photosynthetic activity based on pH data to assess microalgae cultivation. J Environ Manage 276:111343. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111343 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Senousy HH, El-Sheekh MM, Khairy HM et al (2023) Biodiesel production from the marine alga Nannochloropsis oceanica grown on yeast wastewater and the effect on its biochemical composition and gene expression. Plants Basel 12:2898. 10.3390/plants12162898 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Hu Q, Sommerfeld M, Jarvis E et al (2008) Microalgal triacylglycerols as feedstocks for biofuel production: perspectives and advances. Plant J 54:621–639. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03492.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Foyer CH, Noctor G (2002) Photosynthetic Nitrogen Assimilation and Associated Carbon and Respiratory Metabolism. Springer Science & Business Media, NY [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Li-Beisson Y, Shorrosh B, Beisson F et al (2013) Acyl-lipid metabolism. Arabidopsis Book 11:e0161. 10.1199/tab.0161 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Breuer G, Evers WAC, de Vree JH et al (2013) Analysis of Fatty Acid Content and Composition in Microalgae. J Vis Exp. 10.3791/50628 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Ashour M, Kamel A (2017) Enhance Growth and Biochemical Composition of Nannochloropsis oceanica, Cultured under Nutrient Limitation. Using Commercial Agricultural Fertilizers. J Marine Sci Res Dev. 10.4172/2155-9910.1000233 [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Uthaiah NM, Venkataramareddy SR, Mudhol S, Sheikh AY (2025) EPA-rich Nannochloropsis oceanica biomass regulates gut microbiota, alleviates inflammation and ameliorates liver fibrosis in rats. Food Res Int 202:115733. 10.1016/j.foodres.2025.115733 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Baldev E, MubarakAli D, Sivasubramanian V et al (2021) Unveiling the induced lipid production in Chlorella vulgaris under pulsed magnetic field treatment. Chemosphere 279:130673. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130673 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Souza RAS, Saldanha-Corrêa FMP, Gallego AG, Neto AMP (2020) Semi-quantitative determination of ash element content for freeze-dried, defatted, sulfated and pyrolysed biomass of Scenedesmus sp. Biotechnol Biofuels 13:63. 10.1186/s13068-020-01699-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kato Y, Fujihara Y, Vavricka CJ et al (2019) Light/dark cycling causes delayed lipid accumulation and increased photoperiod-based biomass yield by altering metabolic flux in oleaginous Chlamydomonas sp. Biotechnol Biofuels 12:39. 10.1186/s13068-019-1380-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Chen S, Jin Y, Yang N et al (2024) Improving microbial production of value-added products through the intervention of magnetic fields. Bioresour Technol 393:130087. 10.1016/j.biortech.2023.130087 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Santos LO, Silva PGP, Machado BR et al (2022) Update on the application of magnetic fields to microalgal cultures. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 38:1–10. 10.1007/s11274-022-03398-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Chaves AAM, Ribeiro DM, Martins CF et al (2024) Nutritional value of Nannochloropsis oceanica for weaner piglets. Animals 14:3575. 10.3390/ani14243575 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Li T, Chen Z, Wu J et al (2020) The potential productivity of the microalga, Nannochloropsis oceanica SCS-1981, in a solar powered outdoor open pond as an aquaculture feed. Algal Res 46:101793. 10.1016/j.algal.2020.101793 [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Stirk WA, van Staden J (2022) Bioprospecting for bioactive compounds in microalgae: antimicrobial compounds. Biotechnol Adv 59:107977. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2022.107977 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Zhao L, Khang HM, Du J (2024) Incorporation of microalgae (Nannochloropsis oceanica) into plant-based fishcake analogue: physical property characterisation and in vitro digestion analysis. Food Hydrocoll 146:109212. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2023.109212 [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ismail MM, Elkomy R (2022) Phytochemical screening and antimicrobial activity of various marine microalgae and cyanobacteria. Hydrobiol J 58:1. 10.1615/HydrobJ.v58.i1.70 [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Conde TA, Neves BF, Couto D et al (2021) Microalgae as sustainable bio-factories of healthy lipids: evaluating fatty acid content and antioxidant activity. Mar Drugs 19:357. 10.3390/md19070357 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated and analyzed by this study are included in this manuscript (and in its supplementary material). The data can be made available.


Articles from Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES