Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 24;16:176. doi: 10.1186/s12934-017-0790-x

Table 3.

Comparison of fatty acid methyl ester profile of the mutants with the wild type

Fatty acid methyl ester (wt % of total fatty acid methyl esters)
YlB6 YIC7 YIE1 WTa
Caprylic acid methyl ester (C8:0) ND ND ND 25.0
Lauric acid methyl ester (C12:0) ND ND ND 3.2
Myristic acid methyl ester (C14:0) ND ND ND 1.7
Palmitic acid methyl ester (C16:0) 29.1 28.1 30.4 21.1
Stearic acid methyl ester (C18:0) 6.3 6.1 8.5 3.4
Arachidic acid methyl ester (C20:0) 9.8 2.7 8.7 ND
Heneicosanoic acid methyl ester (C21:0) 8.9 2.9 10.5 1.8
Total of fatty acids: Saturated 54.1 39.8 58.1 56.2
Palmitoleic acid methyl ester (C16:1) ND 4.1 10.0 0.9
cis-10-Heptadecanoic acid (C17:1) ND ND ND 8.0
Oleic acid methyl ester (C18:1n9c) 33.6 40.1 25.4 21.0
cis-11Eicosanoic acid (C20:1) ND ND ND 2.0
Total of fatty acids: Monounsaturated 33.6 44.2 35.3 31.9
Linoleic acid methyl ester (C18:2n6c) 12.3 16.0 6.6 11.8
Total of fatty acids: Polyunsaturated 12.3 16.0 6.6 11.8
Total of fatty acids 100 100 100 99.98

The wild type and mutants were grown on LAM containing 100 g L−1 WCO. The values represent the mean ± SD of three independent determinations

WT Wild type; aas reported earlier [9], ND Not detected