| Literature DB >> 26089984 |
Zhenyu Wang1, Guangli Cao1,2, Ju Zheng1, Defeng Fu1, Jinzhu Song1, Junzheng Zhang3, Lei Zhao2, Qian Yang1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) of butanol production from cellulosic biomass is a promising strategy for cost saving compared to other processes featuring dedicated cellulase production. CBP requires microbial strains capable of hydrolyzing biomass with enzymes produced on its own with high rate and high conversion and simultaneously produce a desired product at high yield. However, current reported butanol-producing candidates are unable to utilize cellulose as a sole carbon source and energy source. Consequently, developing a co-culture system using different microorganisms by taking advantage of their specific metabolic capacities to produce butanol directly from cellulose in consolidated bioprocess is of great interest.Entities:
Keywords: Biobutanol; Cellulose; Co-culture; Consolidated bioprocessing; Conversion
Year: 2015 PMID: 26089984 PMCID: PMC4471926 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-015-0266-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Cellulose degradation and cellulase activities for different microbial consortiums
| CKa | Consortium N3 | Strain N3-1b | Strain N3-2b | Strain N3-3b | Strain N3-4b | Strain N3-5b | Combination of isolated strainsc | Pooled SEM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degradation (%) | 4.76 f | 63.35 a | 7.08 e | 29.83 b | 11.57 d | 18.36 c | 12.33 d | 21.77 c | 1.63 |
| Endoglucanase activity (U/mL) | 0 f | 0.67 a | 0.13 cd | 0.26 b | 0.11 de | 0.08 e | 0.19 bc | 0.22 bc | 0.04 |
| Exoglucanase activity (U/mL) | 0 d | 0.54 a | 0.08 c | 0.16 b | 0.02 d | 0.03 d | 0.09 c | 0.17 b | 0.05 |
| β-Glucosidase activity(U/mL) | 0 d | 0.25 a | 0.12 b | 0.23 a | 0.06 c | 0.10 b | 0.14 b | 0.13 b | 0.02 |
For each row of the table, values with the different lowercase letters are significantly different (P < 0.05) while values with the same letter mean no significant difference (P > 0.05)
aCK means a control without any inoculum
bStrains N3-1, N3-2, N3-3, N3-4, and N3-5 stand for five different isolations screened from consortium N3, corresponding to Proteiniphilum acetatigenes, C. celerecrescens, C. saccharolyticum, C. ramosum, and Clostridium sp., respectively
cCombination of isolated strains was a recombination of the isolated strains from N3-1 to N3-5 in the same ratio as an artificial consortium
Fig. 1Composite microbes and stabilities of microbial consortium N3 by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). Patterns coded by number were sequenced for further phylogenetic analysis
Retrieve results of DGGE bands by BLASTn and sequence match for different culture samples
| Bands | Most similar sequence (accession number) | Identity (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| 99 |
| 2 |
| 99 |
| 3 |
| 99 |
| 4 | Uncultured bacterium clone B94 (JX843695.1) | 99 |
| 5 |
| 98 |
| 6, 8 |
| 97 |
| 7 | Uncultured | 97 |
| 9 | Uncultured bacterium clone BD15476 (JQ191120.1) | 93 |
| 10, 11, 13 | Uncultured bacterium clone FL_ 1aaa02c10 (EU775022.1) | 95 |
| 12 | Uncultured | 98 |
Fig. 2Time course of growth, substrate consumption, sugar accumulation, and butanol formation by consortium N3 and its co-culture with C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 (a–d)
Fig. 3Time course of growth, substrate consumption, sugar accumulation, and butanol formation by C. celevecrescens N3-2 and its co-culture with C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 (a–d)
Carbon and redox balances of the fermentations in different conditions
| Cultures | Carbon consumption (mM C) | Ethanol (mM C) | Acetate (mM C) | Acetone (mM C) | Propionic acid (mM C) | Butanol (mM C) | Butyrate (mM C) | Biomass (mM C) | CO2 (mM C) | Percentage of carbon in butanol (%) | H2 (mM) | Carbon balance (%) | O/R ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aa | 799.6 | 209.6 | 119.0 | 0 | 36.6 | 0 | 74.5 | 126.1 | 178.5 | 0 | 74.2 | 93.1 | 0.98 |
| Ba | 840.3 | 39.3 | 80.5 | 86.3 | 0 | 201.6 | 88.3 | 129.2 | 189.4 | 24.0 | 139.9 | 96.9 | 1.10 |
| Cb | 640.7 | 74.3 | 56.4 | 0 | 42.1 | 0 | 189.2 | 104.4 | 132.7 | 0 | 70.7 | 93.5 | 0.98 |
| Db | 692.6 | 50.8 | 70.4 | 73.3 | 0 | 152.4 | 63.1 | 108.0 | 143.2 | 22.0 | 131.5 | 95.5 | 1.03 |
aConditions A and B stand for fermentation using microbial consortium N3 alone and co-culture of N3 and ATCC 824
bConditions C and D stand for fermentation using strain N3-2 alone and co-culture of N3-2 and ATCC 824
Comparison of butanol production in different fermentation processes using cellulosic substrates
| Microorganism | Fermentation process | Substrate | Butanol concentration (g/L) | Butanol yield (g/g substrate) | Butanol productivity (g/L h) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consortium N3 + | Co-culture | Filter paper | 3.73 | 0.145 | 0.020 | This study |
|
| Co-culture | Filter paper | 2.69 | 0.134 | 0.014 | This study |
|
| Co-culture | Crystalline cellulose | 7.90 | 0.198 | 0.037 | [ |
|
| Co-culture | Crystalline cellulose | 2.05 | – | – | [ |
|
| Co-culture | Crystalline cellulose | <1.0a | – | – | [ |
|
| SHF | Corn fiber | 6.40 | 0.138 | 0.073 | [ |
|
| SHF | Corncob residue | 5.60 | 0.130 | 0.057 | [ |
|
| SHF | Sago starch | 10.40 | 0.29 | 0.072 | [ |
|
| SHF | Rice straw | 2.10 | 1.04 | 0.017 | [ |
|
| SSF | Wheat straw | 5.05 | 0.127 | 0.084 | [ |
|
| SSF | Wheat straw | 7.40 | 0.113 | 0.164 | [ |
|
| SSF | Seepweed | 3.50 | 0.101 | 0.101 | [ |
En dash means not determined
aButanol concentration as indicated in reference [18]