| Literature DB >> 32363267 |
Jishi Zhang1, Chunduo Kong1, Mengchen Yang1, Lihua Zang1.
Abstract
Wheat straw was pretreated with either CaO2 or CaO to improve biohydrogen production. Both CaO and CaO2 pretreatments improved the biodegradability of the wheat straw. CaO pretreatment raised the H2 yield by between 48.8 and 163.9% at CaO contents ranging from 2 to 4%. The highest H2 yield [144 mL/g total solid (TS)] was obtained at 121 °C and 6% CaO. In addition, the highest H2 yield from wheat straw pretreated at the same temperature and dosage of CaO2 was 71.8 mL/g TS, which was higher than that of the control group (43.2 mL/g TS), with hot water (121 °C) treatment. Considering pretreatment costs and H2 production potential, CaO was a better pretreatment agent than CaO2.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32363267 PMCID: PMC7191593 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.9b04368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Major Characteristics of the Wheat Straw and Inoculum
| parameter | wheat straw | inoculum |
|---|---|---|
| pH | 6.9 ± 0.1 | 7.5 ± 0.1 |
| moisture content (%) | 7.6 ± 0.1 | 91 ± 0.5 |
| TS, % | 91.5 ± 0.5 | 9.0 ± 0.2 |
| VS, % of TS | 95 ± 0.5 | 95 ± 0.6 |
| C (% of TS)/TOC (mg/L) | 46.4 ± 0.4 | 2100 ± 30 |
| N (% of TS)/NH4+–N (mg/L) | 0.45 ± 0.05 | 225 ± 10 |
| H (% of TS) | 6.2 ± 0.02 | |
| C/N ratio | 100 ± 3 |
Lignin, Cellulose, and Hemicellulose Contents before and after Pretreatment
| addition (%) | cellulose (%) | hemicelluloses (%) | lignin (%) | ash (%) | others (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wheat straw | 36 ± 0.4 | 21 ± 0.1 | 17 ± 0.1 | 2.3 ± 0.1 | 23 ± 0.5 | |
| 0 | 36 ± 0.5 | 20 ± 0.3 | 16 ± 0.5 | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 24 ± 0.5 | |
| 2 | 36 ± 0.6 | 21 ± 0.3 | 16 ± 0.3 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 25 ± 0.5 | |
| 4 | 36 ± 0.7 | 20 ± 0.3 | 15 ± 0.4 | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 27 ± 0.4 | |
| CaO2 | 6 | 37 ± 0.5 | 19 ± 0.4 | 14 ± 0.3 | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 27 ± 0.4 |
| 8 | 40 ± 0.8 | 18 ± 0.2 | 13 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | 26 ± 0.4 | |
| 10 | 39 ± 0.5 | 18 ± 0.4 | 13 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | 27 ± 0.5 | |
| 2 | 36 ± 0.3 | 20 ± 0.4 | 17 ± 0.2 | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 25 ± 0.3 | |
| 4 | 36 ± 0.5 | 19 ± 0.3 | 16 ± 0.2 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 27 ± 0.4 | |
| CaO | 6 | 36 ± 0.7 | 18 ± 0.2 | 16 ± 0.1 | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 27 ± 0.5 |
| 8 | 37 ± 0.6 | 17 ± 0.5 | 15 ± 0.6 | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 28 ± 0.4 | |
| 10 | 38 ± 0.5 | 17 ± 0.3 | 15 ± 0.5 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | 28 ± 0.6 |
Main Properties of the Wheat Straw Hydrolysates
| addition (%) | SCOD (mg/L) | NH4+–N (mg/L) | STOC (mg/L) | pH | solid residue yield (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 7900 ± 100 | 90 ± 3.0 | 3200 ± 10 | 6.0 ± 0.1 | 90 ± 0.5 | |
| 2 | 14600 ± 200 | 64 ± 2.0 | 4450 ± 12 | 7.5 ± 0.1 | 91 ± 0.2 | |
| 4 | 16600 ± 200 | 52 ± 2.0 | 6000 ± 32 | 8.6 ± 0.1 | 91 ± 0.4 | |
| CaO2 | 6 | 18200 ± 200 | 42 ± 2.0 | 7370 ± 30 | 8.9 ± 0.1 | 92 ± 0.1 |
| 8 | 19900 ± 200 | 20 ± 1.0 | 8740 ± 30 | 9.7 ± 0.1 | 93 ± 0.5 | |
| 10 | 18200 ± 200 | 20 ± 2.0 | 8450 ± 30 | 10.2 ± 0.1 | 94 ± 0.6 | |
| 2 | 14200 ± 200 | 71 ± 3.0 | 4030 ± 10 | 8.1 ± 0.1 | 90 ± 0.5 | |
| 4 | 16600 ± 200 | 58 ± 2.0 | 5960 ± 30 | 9.2 ± 0.1 | 91 ± 0.5 | |
| CaO | 6 | 17400 ± 200 | 34 ± 2.0 | 7735 ± 30 | 10.3 ± 0.1 | 92 ± 0.4 |
| 8 | 17600 ± 200 | 24 ± 2.0 | 7970 ± 30 | 11.6 ± 0.2 | 93 ± 0.2 | |
| 10 | 20700 ± 250 | 20 ± 1.0 | 8860 ± 30 | 12.3 ± 0.2 | 95 ± 0.2 |
Figure 1Comparisons of FT-IR curves of all the samples: (a) CaO2-treated wheat straw; (b) CaO-treated wheat straw; (c) fermented residue of the CaO2-treated wheat straw; and (d) fermented residue of the CaO-treated wheat straw.
Figure 2Comparisons of the XRD patterns of all the samples: (a) CaO2-treated wheat straw; (b) CaO-treated wheat straw; (c) fermented residue of the CaO2-treated wheat straw; and (d) the fermented residue of the CaO-treated wheat straw.
Comparisons of Crystallinity Indices and Crystallite Size of All the Samples
| addition (%) | CrI (%) | crystallite size (nm) | strain | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| wheat straw | 53.14 ± 1.20 | 33.8 ± 2.5 | 0.624 ± 0.020 | |
| 0 | 45.27 ± 1.00 | 27.6 ± 1.2 | 0.315 ± 0.015 | |
| 2 | 50.98 ± 1.20 | 26.4 ± 1.1 | 0.124 ± 0.010 | |
| 4 | 47.63 ± 1.50 | 18.1 ± 1.5 | 0.245 ± 0.013 | |
| CaO2 | 6 | 53.41 ± 1.60 | 15.9 ± 0.9 | 0.284 ± 0.015 |
| 8 | 55.16 ± 1.50 | 5.5 ± 1.2 | 0.327 ± 0.020 | |
| 10 | 53.33 ± 1.20 | 6.6 ± 0.8 | 0.715 ± 0.025 | |
| 2 | 51.02 ± 1.20 | 17.5 ± 1.2 | 0.240 ± 0.013 | |
| 4 | 52.91 ± 1.10 | 16.5 ± 1.2 | 0.265 ± 0.013 | |
| CaO | 6 | 54.35 ± 2.20 | 8.8 ± 1.0 | 0.593 ± 0.024 |
| 8 | 55.40 ± 1.20 | 7.0 ± 0.9 | 0.785 ± 0.028 | |
| 10 | 53.52 ± 2.50 | 9.4 ± 1.2 | 0.636 ± 0.108 |
Figure 3Effects of CaO2 (a) and CaO (b) pretreatments on bio-H2 production.
Kinetic Parameters from the Bio-H2 Process Following Pretreatment with CaO/CaO2 Fitted by the Gompertz Model
| CaO2 | CaO | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CaO or CaO2 (%) | λ (d) | λ (d) | ||||||
| 0 | 463 | 88.6 | 2.0 | 0.999 | 463 | 88.6 | 2.0 | 0.999 |
| 2 | 353 | 92.1 | 2.4 | 0.993 | 718 | 126.4 | 2.5 | 0.996 |
| 4 | 704 | 143.8 | 2.2 | 0.994 | 1291 | 124.4 | 1.8 | 0.996 |
| 6 | 794 | 149.2 | 2.2 | 0.992 | 1612 | 154.1 | 1.9 | 0.998 |
| 8 | 749 | 142.1 | 2.3 | 0.992 | 346 | 72.5 | 1.6 | 0.997 |
| 10 | 408 | 77.7 | 1.7 | 0.994 | 298 | 58.4 | 1.0 | 0.995 |
Figure 4Effects of CaO pretreatments on VFA distribution: (a) control VFAs; (b) 2% CaO-treated VFAs; (c) 4% CaO-treated VFAs; (d) 6% CaO-treated VFAs; (e) 8% CaO-treated VFAs; and (f) 10% CaO-treated VFAs.
Figure 5Effects of CaO2 pretreatment on VFA distribution: (a) control VFAs; (b) 2% CaO2-treated VFAs; (c) 4% CaO2-treated VFAs; (d) 6% CaO2-treated VFAs; (e) 8% CaO2-treated VFAs; and (f) 10% CaO2-treated VFAs.