| Literature DB >> 33182839 |
M A Martín-Lara1, L Chica-Redecillas1, A Pérez1, G Blázquez1, G Garcia-Garcia2, M Calero1.
Abstract
In this work, liquid hot water pretreatment (autohydrolysis) was used to improve enzymatic hydrolysis of a commonly consumed vegetable waste in Spain, Italian green pepper, to finally produce fermentable sugars. Firstly, the effect of temperature and contact time on sugar recovery during pretreatment (in insoluble solid and liquid fraction) was studied in detail. Then, enzymatic hydrolysis using commercial cellulase was performed with the insoluble solid resulting from pretreatment. The objective was to compare results with and without pretreatment. The results showed that the pretreatment step was effective to facilitate the sugars release in enzymatic hydrolysis, increasing the global sugar yield. This was especially notable when pretreatment was carried out at 180 °C for 40 min for glucose yields. In these conditions a global glucose yield of 61.02% was obtained. In addition, very low concentrations of phenolic compounds (ranging from 69.12 to 82.24 mg/L) were found in the liquid fraction from enzymatic hydrolysis, decreasing the possibility of fermentation inhibition produced by these components. Results showed that Italian green pepper is an interesting feedstock to obtain free sugars and prevent the enormous quantity of this food waste discarded annually.Entities:
Keywords: Italian green pepper; fermentable sugars; food waste; glucose; hydrolysis; liquid hot water; pretreatment; xylose
Year: 2020 PMID: 33182839 PMCID: PMC7697518 DOI: 10.3390/foods9111640
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Main composition of green pepper used as raw material in this work (data in g by 100 g of dry weight).
| Analysis | Data | |
|---|---|---|
| Structural and nutritional analysis | Carbohydrates (data adapted from USDA) | 75.9 |
| Protein (data adapted from USDA) | 14.1 | |
| Total lipid (data adapted from USDA) | 2.8 | |
| Lignin | 8.7 ± 0.8 | |
| Cellulose | 24.8 ± 1.9 | |
| Hemicellulose | 10.7 ± 1.1 | |
| Extractives | 2.3 ± 0.1 | |
| Proximate analysis | Equilibrium moisture | 3.0 ± 0.1 |
| Fixed carbon | 14.7 ± 1.9 | |
| Volatile matter | 75.3 ± 3.6 | |
| Ashes | 7.0 ± 0.4 | |
| Elemental analysis | Carbon, C% | 43.9 ± 1.2 |
| Nitrogen, N% | 3.2 ± 0.2 | |
| Hydrogen, H% | 6.4 ± 0.4 | |
| Sulfur, S% | <0.1 | |
| Oxygen, O% | 39.4 ± 1.0 | |
| Potential sugars | Glucose | 33.7 ± 3.4 |
| Xylose | 11.4 ± 0.7 | |
| Fructose | 0.9 ± 0.1 | |
| Lactose | 3.4 ± 0.4 | |
| Sacarose | 1.1 ± 0.3 | |
Figure 1Solid yields (SY, %) for each operating conditions of liquid hot water pretreatment.
Figure 2Sugar recovery for each operating conditions of liquid hot water pretreatment. (a) On insoluble solid (IS); (b) on liquid fraction (LF). Data were calculated for total potential glucose and xylose.
Figure 3(a) FTIR spectra of raw material; (b) Insoluble solid resulting from liquid hot water pretreatment performed at 180 °C during 40 min.
Figure 4Saccharification efficiency (SE, %) of enzymatic hydrolysis performed with raw material and pretreated materials at different operating conditions. Data were calculated for total potential glucose and xylose.
Global efficiency of one- and two-step hydrolyses (data were calculated for total glucose and xylose) and phenolic compounds concentration on liquid fractions.
| Process | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No Pretreatment | 150 °C | 165 °C | 180 °C | ||||
| 10 min | 40 min | 10 min | 40 min | 10 min | 40 min | ||
| Log R0 | - | 2.5 | 2.9 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 3.5 | 4.0 |
| Glucose, % | 20.30 ± 1.08 B | 17.20 ± 1.68 A | 27.86 ± 0.76 D | 24.75 ± 2.56 C | 45.84 ± 0.90 F | 34.56 ± 0.52 E | 61.02 ± 1.75 G |
| Xylose, % | 8.58 ± 0.42 A | 8.60 ± 0.51 A | 13.94 ± 1.49 B | 12.89 ± 0.91 B | 19.03 ± 0.76 C | 13.64 ± 0.50 B | 26.12 ± 1.01 D |
| Phenolic compounds concentration, mg/L | 605.57 ± 29.40 E | 72.24 ± 6.51 AB | 80.36 ± 3.16 D | 79.81 ± 6.24 D | 77.44 ± 9.00 CD | 75.58 ± 2.05 BC | 69.12 ± 9.41 A |
A–G Means with different letters in the same row showed statistically significant differences at the 95% confidence level. Reader can see more details in Tables S1–S6 of Supplementary Material.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the comparison of differences between means.
| Dependent Variable | Source | Type III Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F-Ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Temperature | 1914.2 | 1 | 1914.2 | 126.89 | 0.0000 | |
| Time | 1694.4 | 1 | 1694.4 | 112.32 | 0.0000 | |
| Blocks-replicates | 5.77951 | 2 | 2.88976 | 0.19 | 0.8280 | |
|
| 196.115 | 13 | 15.0858 | |||
|
| 3810.28 | 17 | ||||
|
|
| |||||
| Temperature | 222.396 | 1 | 222.396 | 57.92 | 0.0000 | |
| Time | 287.041 | 1 | 287.041 | 78.65 | 0.0000 | |
| Blocks-replicates | 1.77303 | 2 | 0.886517 | 0.23 | 0.7970 | |
|
| 49.9145 | 13 | 3.83957 | |||
|
| 561.125 | 17 | ||||
|
|
| |||||
| Temperature | 59.4075 | 1 | 59.4075 | 3.34 | 0.0905 | |
| Time | 1.46205 | 1 | 1.46205 | 0.08 | 0.7787 | |
| Blocks-replicates | 30.4436 | 2 | 15.2218 | 0.86 | 0.4471 | |
|
| 230.943 | 13 | 17.7649 | |||
|
| 327.256 | 17 |