Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Estimation of Treatment Time for Microbial Preprocessing of Biomass

  • Published:
Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biochemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol involves size reduction, preprocessing, pretreatment, enzyme hydrolysis, and fermentation. In recent years, microbial preprocessing has been gaining attention as a means to produce labile biomass for lessening the requirement of pretreatment severity. However, loss of sugars due to microbial consumption is a major consequence, suggesting its minimization through optimization of nutrients, temperature, and preprocessing time. In this work, we emphasized estimation of fungal preprocessing time, at which higher sugar yields can be achieved after preprocessing and enzyme hydrolysis. The estimation is based on the enzymatic activity profile obtained by treating switchgrass with Phanerochaete chrysosporium for 28 days. Enzyme assays were conducted once in every 7 days for 28 days, for activities of phenol oxidase, peroxidase, β-glucosidase, β-xylosidase, and cellobiohydrolase. We found no activity for phenol oxidase and peroxidase, but the greatest activities for cellulases on the seventh day. We then treated switchgrass for 7 days with P. chrysosporium and observed that the preprocessed switchgrass had higher glucan (39%), xylan (17.5%), and total sugar yields (25.5%) than the unpreprocessed switchgrass (34%, 37.5%, and 20.5%, respectively, p < 0.05). This verifies the utility of using enzyme assays for initial estimation of preprocessing time to enhance sugar yields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Solomon, B. D., Barnes, J. R., & Halvorsen, K. E. (2007). Biomass and Bioenergy, 31, 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mielenz, J. R. (2001). Current Opinion in Microbiology, 4, 324–329.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Saha, B. C., & Hayashi, K. (2004). Lignocellulosic biodegradation. Washington, D.C: American Chemical Society.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Pandey, A., Selvakumar, P., Soccol, C. R., & Nigam, P. (1999). Current Science, 77, 149–171.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Field, J., de Jong, E., Feijoo-Costa, G., & de Bont, J. (1993). Trends in Biotechnology, 11, 44–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Keller, F. A., Hamilton, J. E., & Nguyen, Q. A. (2003). Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 105–108, 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Moldes, D. S. R. C., Cameselle, C., & Sanroman, M. (2003). Chemosphere, 51, 295–303.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Srinivasan, C., D'Souza, T., Boomonathan, K., & Reddy, C. (1995). Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61, 4274–4277.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Baldrian, P., & Valaskova, V. (2008). FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 32, 501–521.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shi, J., Sharma-Shivappa, R. R., Chinn, M., & Howell, N. (2009). Biomass and Bioenergy, 1, 88–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Demain, A., & Solomon, N. (1986). Manual of industrial microbiology and biotechnology. Washington, D.C: American Society for Microbiology.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jackson, C. R., & Vallaire, S. C. (2007). Journal of North American Benthological Society, 26, 743–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bhatnagar, A., Kumar, S., & Gomes, J. (2008). Bioresource Technology, 99, 6917–6927.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Shi, J., Chinn, M. S., & Sharma-Shivappa, R. R. (2008). Bioresource Technology, 99, 6556–6564.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kirk, K. T., & Hou-min, C. (1981). Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 3, 189–196.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was funded through a grant from the Mississippi Technology Alliance—Strategic Biomass Initiative and U.S. DOE. The Phanerochaete chrysosporium strain (BKM-F-1767) was donated by USDA Forest Products Laboratory (Madison, WI, USA).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Swetha Mahalaxmi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mahalaxmi, S., Jackson, C.R., Williford, C. et al. Estimation of Treatment Time for Microbial Preprocessing of Biomass. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 162, 1414–1422 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-010-8917-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-010-8917-0

Keywords

Navigation