Cost-benefit analysis of Nisin

As a mainstream natural biological preservative, the cost-effectiveness of nisin should be comprehensively evaluated by combining the cost structure on the production side and the multiple benefits on the application side. Currently, technologies such as synthetic biology are continuously optimizing its production cost structure, while its unique application value in multiple fields further amplifies the comprehensive benefits. The specific cost-benefit analysis is as follows:

Production Cost Composition and Optimization Status

Strain and Fermentation CostsEarly Nisin production relied on ordinary Lactococcus lactis strains, featuring low fermentation titer. Meanwhile, the high cost of raw materials such as glucose and peptone in the culture medium, coupled with the high energy consumption accounting for 32% of the total cost due to the stringent requirements for precise temperature and pH control during fermentation, resulted in elevated production costs. However, significant improvements have been achieved in recent years. High-yield strains cultivated through technologies such as ARTP mutagenesis and CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing have enabled liquid fermentation to reach a titer of 24,000 IU/mL, while solid-state fermentation using soybean meal has achieved an even higher titer of 45,000 IU/g dry weight. In 2024, the unit production cost of Nisin dropped to $6.8 per kilogram, a 41% decrease compared with 2019. Additionally, solid-state fermentation eliminates the need for additional carbon source supplementation, further reducing raw material costs.

Purification and Compliance CostsThe purity of Nisin is positively correlated with purification costs: higher purity requires more purification steps, leading to increased costs. Moreover, commercial Nisin has a mandatory content requirement of no less than 2.5%. In addition, the compliance cost for newly registered biocides in regions such as the EU can reach €2–5 million. Nevertheless, advancements in biological fermentation technology have simplified the purification process. A single membrane separation followed by spray drying is now sufficient to complete purification, replacing the traditional three-step organic synthesis and two recrystallization processes, thereby reducing the proportion of labor and energy consumption costs to 18%. At the same time, high-purity Nisin has expanded application scenarios, which also allocates the high compliance costs.

Scale and Additional CostsThe global annual demand for Nisin is less than 1,000 tons, far lower than that of chemical preservatives, making it difficult to achieve economies of scale. Furthermore, equipment procurement and maintenance costs were relatively high in the early stages of production. Fortunately, the optimization of digital intelligent manufacturing and supply chain management has improved production efficiency. Some enterprises have reduced customer acquisition costs by 28.4% through big data analysis, which to a certain extent offsets the cost disadvantage caused by small production scale.

Release of Multiple Benefits on the Application Side

Cost Reduction and Efficiency Improvement in the Food IndustryAdding an appropriate amount of Nisin to meat products can extend the shelf life of low-temperature meat products by 2–3 times. When compounded with nitrite, it can reduce nitrite usage by 30%, lowering the risk of carcinogenesis while enhancing product competitiveness. In the dairy industry, adding Nisin to yogurt combined with specific sterilization processes can extend the shelf life from 6 days to 1 month; for ultra-high temperature (UHT) sterilized milk, Nisin addition reduces the spoilage rate from 0.04% to nearly 0%. In canned food production, Nisin addition can reduce heat treatment intensity by 50%. For example, the sterilization temperature of flexible-packaged braised chicken is reduced from 121°C to 105°C, which not only saves energy consumption but also maintains the meat texture, with the shelf life extended to over 6 months. These applications not only reduce food losses caused by microbial spoilage but also lower production energy consumption through process optimization and increase product added value.

Benefit Creation Through Application Expansion in Other FieldsIn the feed industry, Nisin can replace antibiotics to extend feed shelf life, complying with the policy of banning antibiotics in feed. It solves the preservative problem for the feed industry while avoiding the issues caused by antibiotic abuse. In the pharmaceutical field, its inhibitory effect on Gram-positive bacteria provides new ideas for the treatment of drug-resistant bacterial infections, which can reduce part of the R&D costs of new antibacterial drugs. The expansion of its application boundaries further enhances the comprehensive benefits.

Cost-Benefit Comparison and Limitations

Advantages and Disadvantages Compared with Chemical PreservativesIn terms of unit price alone, Nisin is more expensive than chemical preservatives such as potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate, and the price of high-purity imported Nisin is even higher. However, from the perspective of full-cycle cost, its advantages are very prominent. For high-end food products, Nisin can reduce product losses, simplify sterilization processes, and lower compliance risks associated with the use of chemical preservatives, resulting in comprehensive benefits far exceeding those of chemical preservatives. For instance, in the application of UHT sterilized milk, its effect of reducing the spoilage rate is difficult to match for many chemical preservatives.

Limitations in Application Affecting BenefitsThe activity of Nisin is highly sensitive to pH value, with significant activity decline in neutral or alkaline environments, which limits its application in some neutral and alkaline foods. If it is to be used in such products, it needs to be compounded with other preservatives, increasing the cost of formula debugging. In addition, its narrow antibacterial spectrum, which only targets Gram-positive bacteria, makes it difficult to cope with complex microbial contamination scenarios when used alone, which to a certain extent restricts the maximization of its cost-effectiveness.