| Literature DB >> 25709715 |
Jinlan Cheng1, Shao-Yuan Leu2, Jy Zhu3, Rolland Gleisner3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Forest residue is one of the most cost-effective feedstock for biofuel production. It has relatively high bulk density and can be harvested year round, advantageous for reducing transportation cost and eliminating onsite storage. However, forest residues, especially those from softwood species, are highly recalcitrant to biochemical conversion. A severe pretreatment for removing this recalcitrance can result in increased sugar degradation to inhibitors and hence cause difficulties in fermentation at high solid loadings. Here, we presented high titer ethanol production from Douglas-fir forest residue without detoxification. The strong recalcitrance of the Douglas-fir residue was removed by sulfite pretreatment to overcome the recalcitrance of lignocelluloses (SPORL). Sugar degradation to inhibitors was substantially reduced using a novel approach of "pH profiling" by delaying acid application in pretreatment, which facilitated the simultaneous enzymatic saccharification and fermentation of undetoxified whole slurry at a solid loading of 21%.Entities:
Keywords: Enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation; Fermentation inhibitors; Forest residue; High solids processing; High-titer biofuel
Year: 2015 PMID: 25709715 PMCID: PMC4337254 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-015-0205-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Figure 1A schematic experimental block flow diagram with the illustration of the “pH profiling” concept in SPORL for high titer and yield ethanol production without detoxification from a Douglas-fir forest residue.
Chemical compositions of the as harvested and screening upgraded (FS-10) Douglas-fir forest residue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As harvested | 5.9 | 38.4 | 4.4 | 7.5 | 30.5 | 50.3 |
| Screening upgraded (FS-10) | 4.7 | 41.0 | 5.7 | 9.7 | 29.3 | 56.4 |
aMajor carbohydrate = glucan (G) + xylan (X) + mannan (M).
Comparisons of yields (per kg of FS-10) of key wood components in the recovered solids and liquid hydrolysate from SPORL pretreatments at 165°C for 75 min with and without pH profiling
|
|
| ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| t0A4B12 | 388.4 | 13.7 | 15.8 | 170.6 | 612.7 | 21.8 | 17.7 | 54.6 | 120.3 | 5.0 | 9.3 | 228.7 | 841.4 |
| t25A4B12 | 405.6 | 22.7 | 23.7 | 130.1 | 603.9 | 10.0 | 13.5 | 32.8 | 160.8 | 2.2 | 4.0 | 222.9 | 826.8 |
| t35A4B12 | 410.7 | 20.4 | 21.8 | 137.7 | 616.5 | 15.7 | 15.1 | 38.2 | 153.2 | 2.0 | 3.8 | 228.0 | 844.5 |
| t45A4B12 | 406.5 | 21.0 | 25.7 | 131.9 | 622.3 | 9.1 | 14.2 | 30.9 | 159.0 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 218.1 | 840.4 |
atxx stands for acid injection time in min, A4 stands for 4 mL of sulfuric acid in 1 L of initial pretreatment solution, and B12 stands for 12 wt.% of sodium bisulfite charge on wood.
bAs measured after disk milling.
cBased on balance of lignin.
dSum of listed pretreatment hydrolysate components.
Figure 2Effects of acid injection delay time in pretreating a Douglas-fir forest residue on resultant substrate enzymatic digestibility (SED), enzymatic hydrolysis glucose yield (EHGY), HMF, furfural, and acetic acid formation.
Figure 3Effect of acid injection delay time in pretreating a Douglas-fir forest residue on time-dependent resultant substrate enzymatic digestibility (SED).
Figure 4Comparisons of time-dependent (a) ethanol production, (b) sugar consumptions, (c) and furan metabolization during high solid fermentation of the SPORL pretreated Douglas-fir forest residue with and without pH profiling.
Comparisons of fermentation performance among pretreatments with and without pH profiling.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average fermentation performance measure (g/L/h) | |||
| Glucose consumption (72 h) | −0.54 ± 0.06 | −0.70 ± 0.07 | −0.64 ± 0.05 |
| Ethanol productivity (72 h) | 0.42 ± 0.03 | 0.50 ± 0.02 | 0.51 ± 0.02 |
| HMF metabolization (24 h) | −0.05 ± 0.002 | −0.03 ± 0.002 | −0.02 ± 0.006 |
| Maximal ethanol production | |||
| Terminal ethanol concentration (g/L) | 38.6 ± 7.5 | 48.9 ± 1.4 | 45.9 ± 4.6 |
| Ethanol yield (g g/sugar)a | 0.390 ± 0.076 | 0.494 ± 0.014 | 0.460 ± 0.046 |
| Ethanol yield (L/tonne wood)b | 215 ± 42 | 297 ± 9 | 259 ± 26 |
| Ethanol yield (% theoretical)c | 52.8 ± 10.3 | 73.1 ± 2.1 | 63.7 ± 6.4 |
aBased on the total of glucan, mannan, and xylan in the pretreated-solids and glucose, mannose, and xylose in the pretreatment spent liquor.
bCalculated from measured amount of ethanol yield from the amount of pretreated whole slurry used in fermentation and the yield of whole slurry from pretreatment.
cTheoretical yield (406 L tonne wood−1) based on total glucan, mannan, and xylan in the untreated forest residue of FS10.
Figure 5An overall mass balance for high titer and yield ethanol production from a Douglas-fir forest residue pretreated by SPORL with “pH profiling” and acid injection delay time = 25 min.
List of pretreatment conditions of FS10 at 165°C using SPORL with and without pH profiling
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| t0A4B12 | 75 | 1.79 | 2.2 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1.45 | 3 |
| t25A4B12 | 75 | 4.06 | 0 | 12 | 25 | 2.2 | 1.72 | 3 |
| t35A4B12 | 75 | 4.06 | 0 | 12 | 35 | 2.2 | 1.40 | 3 |
| t45A4B12 | 75 | 4.06 | 0 | 12 | 45 | 2.2 | 1.66 | 3 |
atxx stands for acid injection time in min, A4 stands for 4 mL of sulfuric acid in 1 L of initial pretreatment solution, and B12 stands for 12 wt.% of sodium bisulfite charge on wood.