## 3 Results
### Biomass Characteristics of the Oleaginous Yeast Y. lipolytica
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Unit**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Water Used for the Culture Medium**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & & **Distilled Water** & **Tap Water (U)—65 h** & **Tap Water (U)—20 h** \\ \hline Maximum concentration of & & & & & & \\ lipids produced & g/dm3  & - & 9.81 & - & 10.93 & 8.31 \\ \([\)Lmax\(]\)—in the dry biomass & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of storage lipids per & & & & & & \\ biomass formed & g/gd.m. & - & 0.39 & - & 0.50 & 0.51 \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{X}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of storage lipids per & & & & & & \\ carbon substrate & g/g & - & 0.08 & - & 0.15 & 0.17 \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{S}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Volumetric rate of storage & & & & & & \\ lipids production & g/dm3  & - & 0.15 & - & 0.17 & 0.41 \\ \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}v}]\) & & & & & & \\ Specific rate of storage & & & & & & \\ lipid production & g/gd.m./h & - & 0.006 & - & 0.008 & 0.03 \\ \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}}]\) & & & & & & \\ \hline Maximum concentration of & & & & & & \\ protein content & g/dm3  & - & 6.01 & - & 6.04 & 4.19 \\ \([\)Lmax\(]\) & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of protein content & & & & & & \\ per biomass formed & g/gd.m. & - & 0.24 & - & 0.27 & 0.25 \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{X}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of protein content & & & & & & \\ per carbon substrate & g/g & - & 0.05 & - & 0.08 & 0.08 \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{S}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Volumetric rate of protein content & & & & & & \\ \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}v}]\) & & g/dm3  & - & 0.09 & - & 0.09 & 0.21 \\ Specific rate of storage protein content & & & & & & \\ \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}}]\) & & g/gd.m./h & - & 0.004 & - & 0.004 & 0.01 \\ \hline Maximum concentration of & & & & & & \\ other cell constituents & g/dm3  & - & 9.06 & - & 5.36 & 3.94 \\ \([\)Lmax\(]\) & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of content of other & & & & & & \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{X}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of content of other & & & & & & \\ Conversion yield of content of other & & & & & & \\ cell constituents per carbon substrate & g/g & - & 0.07 & - & 0.07 & 0.08 \\ \([\)Y\({}_{\text{L}/\text{S}}]\) & & & & & & \\ Volumetric rate of content of other & & & & & & \\ cell constituents & g/dm3/h & - & 0.14 & - & 0.08 & 0.20 \\ \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}v}]\) & & & & & & \\ Specific rate of storage content of & & & & & & \\ other cell constituents \([\)q\({}_{\text{L}}]\) & & g/gd.m./h & - & 0.006 & - & 0.004 & 0.01 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: _Cont._able composition of the bioproducts extracted from these microorganisms are motivating searches for methods to reduce costs. The concept of coupled fermentation, integrating the co-production of multiple bioproducts in a single process, improves the economic feasibility of microbial oil or protein production. Engineered strains of _Y. lipolytica_ have been developed to simultaneously synthesize lipids and valuable compounds from waste substrates, supporting circular bioeconomy goals [49,50]. An approach to simultaneously synthesize SCO and SCP was presented in this paper. Strategies to reduce SCO and SCP costs include continuous processing, whole-cell utilization, co-production of bulk chemicals [45,51], and genetic modifications to enhance bioproducts yield and quality [15].