Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of solid-state and submerged-state fermentation for the bioprocessing of switchgrass to ethanol and acetate by Clostridium phytofermentans

  • Bioenergy and biofuels
  • Published:
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The conversion of sustainable energy crops using microbiological fermentation to biofuels and bioproducts typically uses submerged-state processes. Alternatively, solid-state fermentation processes have several advantages when compared to the typical submerged-state processes. This study compares the use of solid-state versus submerged-state fermentation using the mesophilic anaerobic bacterium Clostridium phytofermentans in the conversion of switchgrass to the end products of ethanol, acetate, and hydrogen. A shift in the ratio of metabolic products towards more acetate and hydrogen production than ethanol production was observed when C. phytofermentans was grown under solid-state conditions as compared to submerged-state conditions. Results indicated that the end product concentrations (in millimolar) obtained using solid-state fermentation were higher than using submerged-state fermentation. In contrast, the total fermentation products (in weight of product per weight of carbohydrates consumed) and switchgrass conversion were higher for submerged-state fermentation. The conversion of xylan was greater than glucan conversion under both fermentation conditions. An initial pH of 7 and moisture content of 80 % resulted in maximum end products formation. Scanning electron microscopy study showed the presence of biofilm formed by C. phytofermentans growing on switchgrass under submerged-state fermentation whereas bacterial cells attached to surface and no apparent biofilm was observed when grown under solid-state fermentation. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting consolidated bioprocessing of a lignocellulosic substrate by a mesophilic anaerobic bacterium under solid-state fermentation conditions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Cantarel BL, Coutinho PM, Rancurel C, Bernard T, Lombard V, Henrissat B (2009) The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy): an expert resource for Glycogenomics. Nucleic Acids Res 37:D233–D238

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn MS, Nokes SE (2006) Screening of thermophilic anaerobic bacteria for solid substrate cultivation on lignocellulosic substrates. Biotechnology Progr 22:53–59

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn MS, Nokes SE, Strobel HJ (2007) Influence of process conditions on end product formation from Clostridium thermocellum 27405 in solid substrate cultivation on paper pulp sludge. Bioresource Technol 98:2184–2193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn MS, Nokes SE, Strobel HJ (2008) Influence of moisture content and cultivation duration on Clostridium thermocellum 27405 end-product formation in solid substrate cultivation on avicel. Bioresource Technol 99:2664–2671

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Loecker R, Penninck F, Keremans R (1978) Osmotic effects of rapid dilution of cryoprotectants. I. Effect of human erythrocyte swelling. Cryo-Lett 8:131–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Dharmagadda VSS, Nokes SE, Strobel HJ, Flythe MD (2010) Investigation of the metabolic inhibition observed in solid-substrate cultivation of Clostridium thermocellum on cellulose. Bioresource Technol 101:6039–6044

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais P, Molin P (2003) The role of water in solid-state fermentation. Biochem Eng J 13:85–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta S, Kapoor M, Sharma KK, Nair LM, Kuhad RC (2008) Production and recovery of an alkaline exo-polygalacturonase from Bacillus subtilis RCK under solid-state fermentation using statistical approach. Bioresource Technol 99:937–945

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Herrero AA, Gomez RF, Roberts MF (1985) 31P NMR studies of Clostridium thermocellum mechanism of end product inhibition by ethanol. J Biol Chem 260:7442–7451

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hölker U, Lenz J (2005) Solid-state fermentation—are there any biotechnological advantages? Curr Opin Microbiol 8:301–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoogwijk M, Faaij A, van den Broek R, Berndes G, Gielen D, Turkenburg W (2003) Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy. Biomass and Bioenerg 25:119–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin M, Balan V, Gunawan C, Dale BE (2011) Consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) performance of Clostridium phytofermentans on AFEX-treated corn stover for ethanol production. Biotechnol Bioeng 108:1290–1297

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jin M, Gunawan C, Balan V, Dale BE (2012) Consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) AFEXTM-pretreated corn stover for ethanol production using Clostridium phytofermentans at a high solids loading. Biotechnol Bioeng. Article first published online: 22 Feb 2012. doi:10.1002/bit.24458

  • Kamm B, Kamm M (2004) Principles of biorefineries. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 64:137–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim JH, Hosobuchi M, Kishimoto M, Seki T, Yoshida T, Taguchi H (1985) Cellulase production by a solid state culture system. Biotechnol Bioeng 27:1445–1450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krishna C (1999) Production of bacterial cellulases by solid state bioprocessing of banana wastes. Bioresource Technol 69:231–239

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krishna C (2005) Solid-state fermentation systems—an overview. Crit Rev Biotechnol 25:1–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lamed RJ, Lobos JH, Su TM (1988) Effects of stirring and hydrogen on fermentation products of Clostridium thermocellum. Appl Environ Microbiol 54:1216–1221

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leschine S (2009) Impacts of biofilm formation on cellulose fermentation. No. DOE/ER/15330-FTR

  • Lin Y, Tanaka S (2006) Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and prospects. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 69:627–642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lynd LR, Weimer PJ, van Zyl WH, Pretorius IS (2002) Microbial cellulose utilization: fundamentals and biotechnology. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 66:506–577

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McKendry P (2002) Energy production from biomass (part 1): overview of biomass. Bioresource Technol 83:37–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin SB, Bouton J, Bransby D, Conger B, Ocumpaugh W, Parrish D (1999) Developing switchgrass as a bioenergy crop. In: Janick J (ed) Perspectives on new crops and new uses. ASHS, Alexandra, pp 282–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller GL (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing. sugar. Anal Chem 31(3):426–428

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee AK, Adhikari H, Rai SK (2008) Production of alkaline protease by a thermophilic Bacillus subtilis under solid-state fermentation (SSF) condition using Imperata cylindrica grass and potato peel as low-cost medium: characterization and application of enzyme in detergent formulation. Biochem Eng J 39:353–361

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pandey A, Soccol CR, Mitchell D (2000) New developments in solid state fermentation: I—bioprocesses and products. Process Biochem 35:1153–1169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel D, Patzek TW (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Nat Resour Res 14:65–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson T, Singh D, Nigam P (2001) Solid-state fermentation: a promising microbial technology for secondary metabolite production. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 55:284–289

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson MA, Reed RL, McLaughlin SB, Wullschleger SD, Conger BV, Parrish DJ (1996) Switchgrass as a sustainable bioenergy crop. Bioresource Technol 56:83–93

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman SR, Goodell JJ, Milliken CE, Morris JA, Gorensek MB (2012) A new process developed for separation of lignin from ammonium hydroxide pretreatment solutions. Environ Prog Sust Energ 31:130–138

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singhania RR, Patel AK, Soccol CR, Pandey A (2009) Recent advances in solid-state fermentation. Biochem Engineering J 44:13–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Tepleton D, Crocker D (2011) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass. Technical Report, NREL/TP-510-42618. Revised July 2011

  • Tengerdy KH (1996) Cellulase production by solid-state fermentation. J Sci Ind Res 55:313–316

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Todd WG (1972) Water deficits and enzymatic activity. In: Kozlowskim TT (ed) Plant response and control of water balance, vol. 3, water deficits and plant growth. Academic, New York, pp 117–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolonen AC, Haas W, Chilaka AC, Aach J, Gygi SP, Church GM (2011) Proteome-wide systems analysis of a cellulosic biofuel-producing microbe. Mol Syst Biol 7:461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warnick TA, Methe BA, Leschine SB (2002) Clostridium phytofermentans sp. nov., a cellulolytic mesophile from forest soil. Int J Syst Evol Micr 52:1155–1160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weber C, Farwick A, Benisch F, Brat D, Dietz H, Subtil T (2010) Trends and challenges in the microbial production of lignocellulosic bioalcohol fuels. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87:1303–1315

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe J, Steponkus PL (1983) Tension in the plasma membrane during osmotic contraction. Cryo-Lett 4:315–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang J (2004) Economic analysis of cellulase production by Clostridium thermocellum in solid state and submerged fermentation. Thesis, University of Kentucky

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by US Department of Energy award number DE-FG36-08GO88071. The authors acknowledge the assistance of Jim Frederick at the Pee Dee Research Center where the switchgrass was grown and harvested, JoAn Hudson for assistance with electron microscopy, and the guidance of Karl Kelly.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Charles K. Morlok

    Present address: College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, Clemson University, 132 Long Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA

    Abhiney Jain & J. Michael Henson

Authors
  1. Abhiney Jain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles K. Morlok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Michael Henson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Michael Henson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jain, A., Morlok, C.K. & Henson, J.M. Comparison of solid-state and submerged-state fermentation for the bioprocessing of switchgrass to ethanol and acetate by Clostridium phytofermentans . Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97, 905–917 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4511-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4511-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation