| Literature DB >> 25248867 |
Olukayode O Kuloyo1, James C du Preez, Maria del Prado García-Aparicio, Stephanus G Kilian, Laurinda Steyn, Johann Görgens.
Abstract
The feasibility of ethanol production using an enzymatic hydrolysate of pretreated cladodes of Opuntia ficus-indica (prickly pear cactus) as carbohydrate feedstock was investigated, including a comprehensive chemical analysis of the cladode biomass and the effects of limited aeration on the fermentation profiles and sugar utilization. The low xylose and negligible mannose content of the cladode biomass used in this study suggested that the hemicellulose structure of the O. ficus-indica cladode was atypical of hardwood or softwood hemicelluloses. Separate hydrolysis and fermentation and simultaneous saccharification and fermentation procedures using Kluyveromyces marxianus and Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 40 and 35 °C, respectively, gave similar ethanol yields under non-aerated conditions. In oxygen-limited cultures K. marxianus exhibited almost double the ethanol productivity compared to non-aerated cultures, although after sugar depletion utilization of the produced ethanol was evident. Ethanol concentrations of up to 19.5 and 20.6 g l(-1) were obtained with K. marxianus and S. cerevisiae, respectively, representing 66 and 70 % of the theoretical yield on total sugars in the hydrolysate. Because of the low xylan content of the cladode biomass, a yeast capable of xylose fermentation might not be a prerequisite for ethanol production. K. marxianus, therefore, has potential as an alternative to S. cerevisiae for bioethanol production. However, the relatively low concentration of fermentable sugars in the O. ficus-indica cladode hydrolysate presents a technical constraint for commercial exploitation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25248867 PMCID: PMC4210634 DOI: 10.1007/s11274-014-1745-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Microbiol Biotechnol ISSN: 0959-3993 Impact factor: 3.312
Mean chemical composition (± SD of the mean) of O. ficus-indica cladodes in weight per cent of dry biomass, compared to some conventional lignocellulosic feedstocks
| Constituent (% dry wt) |
|
| Sugar cane bagasseb | Corn stoverc | Barley strawd |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| *Glucan | 23.1 ± 1.3 | 15.3 | 40.2 | 37.7 | 37.1 |
| Xylan | 3.9 ± 0.4 | 1.9 | 22.5 | 21.6 | 21.3 |
| Arabinan | 3.8 ± 0.3 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 2.4 | 3.8 |
| *Galactan | 6.4 ± 0.6 | 3.4 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 1.2 |
| *Fructan | 4.8 ± 0.4 | – | – | – | – |
| Fucan | – | 0.07 | |||
| *Mannan | Trace | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.4 | – |
| Rhamnan | – | 0.7 | – | – | – |
| Total sugars | 42.0 | 26 | 66.6 | 63.0 | 63.4 |
| Total fermentable sugars | 34.3 | 19.7 | 42.1 | 39.0 | 38.3 |
| Lignin | 7.9 ± 0.8 | 16 | 25.2 | 18.6 | 19.2 |
| Ash | 16.8 ± 0.2 | n/a | 10–15 | 10.1 | 8.2 |
| Protein | 7.5 ± 0.2 | 6.42 | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Extractives | 24.3 ± 1.1 | 17.7 | n/a | 5.6 | 15.4 |
| Total | 98.5 |
* Readily fermentable constituent sugars
a(Ginestra et al. 2009) The author used a mixture of three cultivars, Surfarina, Muscaredda and Sanguigna, which were cultivated in Italy
b(National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2013)
c(National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2013)
d(García-Aparicio et al. 2011)
Fig. 1Fermentation profiles of S. cerevisiae Y-0528 and K. marxianus Y-2791 in a chemically defined medium containing a sugar mixture resembling an enzymatic hydrolysate of O. ficus-indica cladode biomass using different aeration conditions. a S. cerevisiae, non-aerated. b K. marxianus, non-aerated, and c K. marxianus, oxygen-limited cultivation
Fermentation parameters of S. cerevisiae Y-0528 and K. marxianus Y-2791 in a chemically defined medium containing a sugar mixture resembling an enzymatic hydrolysate of O. ficus-indica cladode biomass
| Parameter |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-aerated | Non-aerated | Oxygen-limited | |
| Residual sugars, g l−1 | 15.3 | 18.2 | 0.0 |
| µmax, h−1 | 0.38 | 0.47 | 0.52 |
| Qp, g ethanol l−1 h−1 | 3.28 | 0.85 | 2.98 |
| Qp, g biomass l−1 h−1 | 0.27 | 0.39 | 0.55 |
| Maximum ethanol, g l−1 | 25.8 | 25.0 | 22.1 |
| Maximum dry biomass, g l−1 | 2.6 | 1.90 | 8.5 |
| Ethanol yield on utilized sugars | 0.39 | 0.38 | 0.31 |
| Ethanol yield on total sugars | 0.31 | 0.30 | 0.26 |
| Biomass yield on utilized sugars | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.1 |
| Biomass yield on total sugars | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.1 |
Mean values (which were within ±2 % of the individual values) of duplicate experiments are shown
Fig. 2Profiles of specific ethanol productivity versus time during cultivation of S. cerevisiae and K. marxianus under non-aerated and oxygen-limited conditions in a chemically defined medium containing a sugar mixture simulating an enzymatic hydrolysate of O. ficus-indica cladode biomass
Fig. 3SHF profiles of S. cerevisiae Y-0528 and K. marxianus Y-2791 in O. ficus-indica cladode hydrolysate using different aeration conditions. a S. cerevisiae, non-aerated. b K. marxianus, non-aerated. c K. marxianus, oxygen-limited. Time zero indicates the time of inoculation following 48 h of enzymatic hydrolysis at 50 °C
Fermentation parameters of S. cerevisiae and K. marxianus during SHF and SSF of an O. ficus-indica cladode hydrolysate. Mean values (which were within ±2 % of the individual values) of duplicate experiments are shown
| Parameter | SHF | SSF | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Non-aerated | Non-aerated | Oxygen-limited | Non-aerated | Non-aerated | Oxygen-limited | |
| Residual sugars, g l−1 | 9.4 | 13.5 | 7.7 | 5.4 | 13.3 | 2.7 |
| Qp (EtOH), g l−1 h−1 | 1.48 | 0.93 | 2.23 | 1.41 | 1.08 | 1.57 |
| Qp (overall), g l−1 h−1 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.57 | 0.54 | 0.71 |
| Max. ethanol, g l−1 | 19.6 | 19.5 | 14.7 | 20.6 | 19.3 | 14.2 |
| YEtOH, utilized sugars | 0.40 | 0.42 | 0.28 | nd | nd | nd |
| YEtOH, total sugars | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.25 | 0.35 | 0.3 | 0.24 |
nd not determined
Fig. 4SSF profiles of S. cerevisiae Y-0528 and K. marxianus Y-2791 in O. ficus-indica cladode hydrolysate using different conditions of aeration. a S. cerevisiae, non-aerated, b K. marxianus, non-aerated, c K. marxianus, oxygen-limited. Time zero indicates the time of inoculation, which was 10 min after the addition of enzymes