t-,/rrr',r47c

t]
biomass harvested unde. two conditions was obseded. Under unauteldvcd
coMiriotr r incrcsc in nrolcin *.s 52.28% ov€r the inri.l vatue, but oulmlavins
read 1o an increase of 7026% in prolein bionN yi€ld. This indicated the
nnpoftnce ofaul@laving the nedium dudng co-culturc form€nrarion.
Tl'e rcsulls showed $at th. b.cteria (r.,/rzw) @ nor prcbably
grcv in symbiosis with the fuga (Arcch"iotw tpecia) s rh@ w.s p@. product
yicld. Tle po$ible realon for poor yield could be due ro the prcscncc of
mycoroxins produc€d by th€ fiu8ttt. Mohnood et al. (t990) discuss.d an inhibired
gtoitrh of B.fM and assisn€d it to toxins. Tle rsults tudd showcd tiar
autoclaving prcbably detoxified thc toxic irhibnory facloE produc.d by rhe furgi
(.4tuchniotrs speci6). The findines oiAthar e, al. (1995) and Saima 0996) also
support the fact l]],at B.ll@M .an not grcw in symbiosis willj yelst of tungi.
lDprcvcd prcduct yield have.lso becn achiaed thrcugh symbiolic fermenktion of
dillsot srrais of bactdia (go. l97l i Han, 1975 dd Rod.iqu€z aId Calledo.
1993). Some wdke6 have rcloncd d improvcmcnt in the yicld rhrough symbioric
f€rmentation by ccculture cullivalion ofy.asr 0nd tuogi (Vazquez et at., t993 i lin
.r al, 1994 and lkegami md Yarhiio, 1997). Usins two shins of fungi ed rwo
slrsins of y€ast in symbiosis, Fuska and Kallafova (1977), and Buaquio ?r a/.
(1981) got nnproved prodDcl yi€ld lhrough fermentaiion. The possible reason Iit
symbiosis among two kinds of fun8i of ye{st and between two kinds oi fungi and
yeast is rhal they do not produce []c bxic compou& hmful fo. th. olhcr or one
deioxify the loxic ompomds pmduced by thc oth..
2. Effect ofAddition of Dilferent kvels ofMolasses.
For enhmeme of growth of A./ar!r ad tunhq enrichm€nl of protcin,
lhe srcwth medinm was supplcmcnt€d with various levels of molasses ancr 48
hours of fermenlalion. Five levels of molasscs were tesl€d along with a conlrol
(withoul mobsses). The avemge lru€ prolein values obtained in the bionass,