| Literature DB >> 28831456 |
M G Mithra1, G Padmaja1.
Abstract
Two strategies leading to enzyme saving during saccharification of pretreated lignocellulo-starch biomass (LCSB) was investigated which included reducing enzyme dosage by varying their levels in enzyme cocktails and enhancing the fermentable sugar yield in enzyme-reduced systems using detoxification chemicals. Time course release of reducing sugars (RS) during 24-120 h was significantly higher when an enzyme cocktail containing full dose of cellulase (16 FPU/g cellulose) along with half dose each of xylanase (1.5 mg protein/g hemicelluloses) and Stargen (12.5 μl/g biomass) was used to saccharify conventional dilute sulphuric acid (DSA) pretreated biomass compared to a parallel system where only one-fourth the dose of the latter two enzymes was used. The reduction in RS content in the 120 h saccharified mash to the extent of 3-4 g/L compared to the system saccharified with full complement of the three enzymes could be overcome considerably by supplementing the system (half dose of two enzymes) with detoxification chemical mix incorporating Tween 20, PEG 4000 and sodium borohydride. Microwave (MW)-assisted DSA pretreated biomass on saccharification with enzyme cocktail having full dose of cellulase and half dose of Stargen along with detoxification chemicals gave significantly higher RS yield than DSA pretreated system saccharified using three enzymes. The study showed that xylanase could be eliminated during saccharification of MW-assisted DSA pretreated biomass without affecting RS yield when detoxification chemicals were also supplemented. The Saccharification Efficiency and Overall Conversion Efficiency were also high for the MW-assisted DSA pretreated biomass. Since whole slurry saccharifcation of pretreated biomass is essential to conserve fermentable sugars in LCSB saccharification, detoxification of soluble inhibitors is equally important as channelling out of insoluble lignin remaining in the residue. As one of the major factors contributing to the cost of ethanol production from LCSB is the cost of enzymes, appropriate modification of enzyme cocktail based on the composition of the pretreated biomass coupled with effective detoxification of the slurry would be a promising approach towards cost reduction.Entities:
Keywords: Agriculture; Biochemistry; Biotechnology; Energy; Environmental science
Year: 2017 PMID: 28831456 PMCID: PMC5553344 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00384
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Compositional Profile* of The Selected Root and Vegetable Processing Residues (expressed as g/100 g dry basis).
| Parameters | SP peel | EFY peel | Tannia peel | GY peel | BR peel | VB peel | PK peel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cellulose | 13.31 ± 0.03 | 15.63 ± 0.20 | 17.32 ± 0.34 | 18.02 ± 0.58 | 18.94 ± 0.20 | 22.40 ± 0.64 | 21.05 ± 0.79 |
| Hemicellulose | 13.32 ± 0.14 | 14.00 ± 0.00 | 14.48 ± 0.35 | 20.02 ± 0.57 | 19.17 ± 0.55 | 15.19 ± 0.56 | 17.74 ± 0.47 |
| Starch | 32.05 ± 0.09 | 28.96 ± 0.42 | 30.46 ± 0.37 | 28.84 ± 0.44 | 27.13 ± 0.00 | 36.56 ± 0.00 | 24.61 ± 0.00 |
| Lignin | 8.15 ± 0.43 | 7.01 ± 0.13 | 8. 26 ± 0.11 | 6.72 ± 0.17 | 3.87 ± 0.34 | 10.55 ± 0.33 | 10.66 ± 0.84 |
| Total sugars | 11.21 ± 0.01 | 5.53 ± 0.05 | 2.42 ± 0.05 | 4.33 ± 0.00 | 17.07 ± 0.12 | 2.77 ± 0.01 | 8.73 ± 0.06 |
| Reducing sugars | 6.22 ± 0.03 | 2.58 ± 0.00 | 1.34 ± 0.00 | 2.17 ± 0.00 | 6.91 ± 0.04 | 1.71 ± 0.00 | 6.50 ± 0.00 |
| Ash | 3.77 ±0.15 | 9.67 ± 0.12 | 5.27 ± 0.31 | 3.29 ± 0.24 | 5.66 ± 0.10 | 3.40 ± 0.08 | 4.22 ± 0.06 |
| Others | 18.19 | 19.20 | 21.79 | 18.78 | 8.16 | 9.13 | 13.00 |
Mean ± SD from three replicate.
Calculated by difference (from hundred) of all the above components except reducing sugars which is part of the total sugars and include in addition to moisture (8–10%), protein, extractives, phenols, pigments, vitamins, free amino acids etc. Source: Mithra and Padmaja (2016a; 2017).
Reducing sugars released from conventional DSA pretreated processing residues during saccharification with different enzyme loading rates.
| Pretreatment | Reducing sugars in the saccharified mash (g/L) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 96 h | 120 h | |
| (a) SP peel (43.33) | |||||
| T1 | 49.24± 0.64 (3.24) | 49.72 ± 0.92 (4.12) | 52.59 ± 0.27 (3.58) | 59.82 ± 0.49 (3.01) | 59.89± 0.63 (2.98) |
| T2 | 47.74 ± 0.47 (4.74) | 49.30 ± 0.61 (4.53) | 51.99 ± 0.54 (4.18) | 55.29 ±0.42 (7.54) | 56.25 ± 0.52 (6.62) |
| (b) EFY peel (29.26) | |||||
| T1 | 33.42± 0.55 (5.66) | 35.77 ± 0.72 (4.56) | 37.91 ± 0.43 (4.55) | 45.17 ± 0.46 (3.84) | 45.67 ± 0.48 (3.41) |
| T2 | 31.79 ± 0.74 (7.29) | 33.66 ± 0.97 (6.67) | 36.02 ± 0.44 (6.44) | 39.92 ± 0.57 (9.09) | 40.77 ± 0.61 (8.31) |
| (c) Tannia peel (35.82) | |||||
| T1 | 41.78 ± 0.64 (2.37) | 42.67 ± 0.64 (2.63) | 45.54 ±0.48 (2.29) | 47.84 ± 0.73 (2.64) | 47.96 ± 0.54 (2.60) |
| T2 | 40.09 ± 0.77 (4.06) | 41.72 ± 0.47 (3.58) | 43.82 ± 0.69 (4.01) | 46.92 ± 0.55 (3.56) | 47.04 ± 0.61 (3.52) |
| (d) GY peel (39.48) | |||||
| T1 | 45.90 ± 0.57 (2.96) | 47.03 ± 0.54 (3.58) | 51.02 ± 0.73 (2.38) | 58.63 ± 0.64 (1.29) | 59.01 ± 0.44 (0.95) |
| T2 | 42.88 ± 0.77 (5.98) | 46.42 ± 0.61 (4.19) | 49.00 ± 0.84 (4.40) | 58.22 ± 0.54 (1.70) | 58.44 ± 0.72 (1.52) |
| (e) BR peel (43.00) | |||||
| T1 | 53.09 ± 0.91 (2.39) | 53.69 ± 0.88 (3.03) | 56.36 ± 0.83 (2.60) | 64.66 ± 0.52 (1.03) | 64.77 ± 0.61 (0.99) |
| T2 | 45.94 ± 0.87 (9.54) | 48.95 ± 0.73 (7.77) | 50.98 ± 0.42 (7.98) | 60.09 ± 0.73 (5.60) | 61.19 ± 0.54 (4.57) |
| (f) PK peel (40.56) | |||||
| T1 | 48.77 ± 0.54 (3.01) | 49.49 ± 0.74 (3.56) | 52.47 ± 0.57 (2.99) | 59.85 ± 0.31 (2.35) | 60.26 ± 0.77 (1.98) |
| T2 | 43.53 ± 0.58 (8.25) | 46.75 ± 0.88 (6.30) | 49.08 ± 0.64 (6.38) | 58.11 ± 0.47 (4.09) | 59.81 ± 0.64 (2.43) |
| (g) VB peel (45.00) | |||||
| T1 | 50.72 ± 0.31 (3.25) | 51.77 ± 0.73 (3.58) | 55.01 ± 0.27 (2.69) | 61.94 ± 0.63 (2.46) | 62.86 ± 0.87 (1.57) |
| T2 | 48.62 ± 0.77 (5.35) | 50.15 ± 0.72 (5.20) | 52.25 ± 0.84 (5.45) | 57.15 ± 0.91 (7.25) | 58.35 ± 0.76 (6.08) |
Initial content of sugars in the pretreated liquor; figures in parentheses in each column indicate the decrease in RS compared to the system with full complement of the three enzymes (Mithra et al., 2017a); T1: Stargen and Ecozyme XY 50 half dose and Ecozyme RT80 full dose; T2: Stargen and Ecozyme XY 50 1/4thdose and Ecozyme RT 80 full dose. Each value is mean ± SD from three replicates.
Time course release of reducing sugars from conventional DSA pretreated processing residues along with detoxifying chemicals (T3)*.
| Biomass | Reducing sugars in the saccharified mash (g/L) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 96 h | 120 h | |
| SP peel | 51.09c | 51.11c | 54.84b | 61.33a | 61.02a (1.85) |
| EFY peel | 35.66d | 37.88c | 39.23b | 47.21a | 47.63a (1.45) |
| Tannia peel | 43.09c | 44.06c | 46.08b | 48.48a | 49.01a (1.55) |
| GY peel | 46.77d | 48.41c | 52.03b | 58.91a | 59.33a (0.63) |
| BR peel | 54.21c | 55.22c | 57.12b | 65.07a | 65.33a (0.43) |
| PK peel | 49.09e | 51.42d | 54.08c | 60.11b | 61.42a (0.82) |
| VB peel | 51.23d | 53.01c | 56.77b | 63.21a | 63.88a (0.55) |
T3: T1 (Stargen and Ecozyme XY 50 half dose and Ecozyme RT80 full dose) along with detoxification mix (0.25% Tween 20+ 0.25% PEG+ 40 mM NaBH4); figures in parentheses indicate the decrease in RS compared to the system with full complement of the three enzymes (Mithra et al., 2017a); statistical comparison was made within each row and values with different superscripts are significant at p < 0.05.
Fig. 1Reducing sugar yield from MW-assisted DSA pretreated biomass saccharified using Ecozyme RT80 (full dose) and Stargen (half dose) along with detoxifying chemicals (T4). Line 2 (DF) gives the decrease in reducing sugars released from T4 compared to full complement of enzymes.
Saccharification Efficiency (%) in conventional and MW-assisted DSA pretreated lignocellulo-starch biomass: effect of enzyme loading rates and detoxification chemicals.
| Biomass | SE (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional DSA pretreatment | Microwave-assisted DSA pretreatment and saccharification | |||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |
| SP peel | 23.69c | 18.49d | 25.31b | 33.11a |
| EFY peel | 25.59c | 17.95d | 28.65b | 33.00a |
| Tannia peel | 18.77c | 17.34d | 20.39b | 30.10a |
| GY peel | 27.42bc | 26.63c | 27.88b | 29.27a |
| BR peel | 26.46b | 22.10c | 27.13b | 28.89a |
| PK peel | 27.31bc | 26.68c | 28.92b | 31.51a |
| VB peel | 23.22c | 17.35d | 24.54b | 26.00a |
Conventional DSA pretreatment (121 °C; 60 min; 0.1 M H2SO4); T1: Stargen and Ecozyme XY 50 half dose and Ecozyme RT80 full dose; T2: Stargen and Ecozyme XY 50 1/4thdose and Ecozyme RT 80 full dose; T3 is T1 + detoxifying chemicals (0.25% Tween 20+ 0.25% PEG+ 40 mM NaBH4); T4 is MW(600 W)-assisted DSA pretreatment (7 min) with detoxifying chemicals; statistical comparison was made within each row and values with different superscripts are significant at p < 0.05.
Overall Conversion Efficiency (%) in conventional and MW-assisted DSA pretreated lignocellulo-starch biomass: effect of enzyme loading rates and detoxification chemicals*.
| Biomass | OCE (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional DSA pretreatment and saccharification | MW-assisted DSA pretreatment and saccharification | |||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |
| SP peel | 85.69b (4.27) | 80.48c (9.48) | 87.31a (2.65) | 87.97a (2.72) |
| EFY peel | 71.23c (5.31) | 63.58d (12.96) | 74.28 b (0.88) | 89.21a (2.43) |
| Tannia peel | 74.14c (4.02) | 72.72d (5.44) | 75.76 b (1.88) | 86.84a (2.73) |
| GY peel | 82.87bc (1.33) | 82.07c (2.13) | 83.32b (0.88) | 88.37a (2.02) |
| BR peel | 78.70b (1.2) | 74.35c (5.55) | 79.38b (0.52) | 84.78a (1.93) |
| PK peel | 83.53c (2.75) | 82.91c (3.37) | 85.14b (1.14) | 93.44a (1.93) |
| VB peel | 81.71b (2.04) | 75.85c (7.90) | 83.04a (0.71) | 82.48a (2.43) |
Figures in parentheses indicate the decrease in RS compared to the system with full complement of the three enzymes (Mithra et al., 2017a; b); other footnotes as in Table 3; statistical comparison was made within each row and values with different superscripts are significant at p < 0.05.
HPLC sugar profile in the hydrolysates from conventional and MW-assisted DSA pretreated and sachharified lignocellulo-starch biomass.
| Type of sugars | Sugar content (g/L) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SP peel | EFY peel | Tannia peel | GY peel | BR peel | PK peel | VB peel | |
| (a) Conventional DSA pretreatment (T3) and saccharification | |||||||
| Glucose | 33.41 | 21.33 | 19.55 | 27.31 | 40.36 | 33.21 | 29.65 |
| Xylose | 4.23 | 9.55 | 11.64 | 14.69 | 1.96 | 8.61 | 11.40 |
| Mannose | ND | 1.47 | 3.69 | 5.64 | 2.91 | ND | 7.36 |
| Arabinose | 9.71 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| Galactose | ND | ND | ND | ND | 5.64 | 1.36 | ND |
| (b) MW-assisted DSA pretreatment (T4) and saccharification | |||||||
| Glucose | 35.13 | 23.05 | 21.27 | 29.03 | 42.08 | 34.93 | 31.37 |
| Xylose | 5.77 | 11.09 | 13.18 | 15.40 | 3.50 | 10.15 | 12.94 |
| Mannose | ND | 2.41 | 4.63 | 6.58 | 3.85 | ND | 8.30 |
| Arabinose | 10.26 | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| Galactose | ND | ND | ND | ND | 6.88 | 2.60 | ND |
T3: Conventional DSA pretreated residues (121 °C; 60 min; 0.1 M H2SO4) + detoxification chemicals; T4 is MW (600 W)-assisted DSA pretreated residues (7 min) with detoxifying chemicals; Both the systems were saccharified using Stargen and Ecozyme XY50 at half dose and Ecozyme RT80 full dose; ND: not detected; each value represents mean from two runs.