Abstract
Dark fermentative hydrogen production from glucose by Enterobacter aerogenes was studied. The kinetic models of modified Gompertz and Logistic were employed to investigate the progress of hydrogen production. The predicted maximum hydrogen production (Hmax) by modified Gompertz and Logistic was 11.92 and 11.28 mL, respectively. The kinetic models of modified Gompertz, Logistic, and Richards were used to study biomass growth in batch experiments. The maximum biomass growth (Xmax) by models of modified Gompertz, Logistic, and Richards was 4.90, 4.85, and 4.95 (g L−1), respectively. The modified Gompertz was applied to simulate the consumption of glucose where the maximum degraded glucose (Smax) was obtained 19.77 g L−1. The correlation coefficients of all the models were over 0.97, which illustrate that the models fit the data very well. However, the modified Gompertz model presents higher R2 and lower RSS and is more appropriate than the other models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boshagh F, Rostami K (2020) A review of application of experimental design techniques related to dark fermentative hydrogen production. JREE 7:27–42. https://doi.org/10.30501/jree.2020.106767
Boshagh F, Rostami K, Moazami N (2019a) Immobilization of Enterobacter aerogenes on carbon fiber and activated carbon to study hydrogen production enhancement. Biochem Eng J 144:64–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2019.01.014
Boshagh F, Rostami K, Moazami N (2019b) Biohydrogen production by immobilized Enterobacter aerogenes on functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotube. Int J Hydrogen Energy 44:14395–14405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.199
Chezeau B, Vial C (2019) Modeling and simulation of the biohydrogen production processes. In: Biohydrogen. Elsevier, pp 445–483
Gadhamshetty V, Arudchelvam Y, Nirmalakhandan N, Johnson DC (2010) Modeling dark fermentation for biohydrogen production: ADM1-based model vs. Gompertz model Int J Hydrogen Energy 35:479–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.11.007
Gadhe A, Sonawane SS, Varma MN (2014) Kinetic analysis of biohydrogen production from complex dairy wastewater under optimized condition. Int J Hydrogen Energy 39:1306–1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.11.022
Ghimire A, Frunzo L, Pirozzi F et al (2015) A review on dark fermentative biohydrogen production from organic biomass: Process parameters and use of by-products. Appl Energy 144:73–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.045
Kumar N, Ghosh A, Das D (2001) Redirection of biochemical pathways for the enhancement of H2 production by Enterobacter cloacae. Biotechnol Lett 23:537–541. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010334803961
Kumar N, Monga PS, Biswas AK, Das D (2000) Modeling and simulation of clean fuel production by Enterobacter cloacae IIT-BT 08. Int J Hydrogen Energy 25:945–952. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00017-3
Lin P-Y, Whang L-M, Wu Y-R et al (2007) Biological hydrogen production of the genus Clostridium: metabolic study and mathematical model simulation. Int J Hydrogen Energy 32:1728–1735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.12.009
Miller GL (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal Chem 31:426–428
Mu Y, Wang G, Yu H-Q (2006) Kinetic modeling of batch hydrogen production process by mixed anaerobic cultures. Bioresour Technol 97:1302–1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2005.05.014
Mu Y, Yu H, Wang G (2007) A kinetic approach to anaerobic hydrogen-producing process. Water Res 41:1152–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2006.11.047
Ntaikou I, Gavala HN, Kornaros M, Lyberatos G (2008) Hydrogen production from sugars and sweet sorghum biomass using Ruminococcus albus. Int J Hydrogen Energy 33:1153–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.10.053
Ntaikou I, Gavala HN, Lyberatos G (2009) Modeling of fermentative hydrogen production from the bacterium Ruminococcus albus: Definition of metabolism and kinetics during growth on glucose. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34:3697–3709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.02.057
Pradhan N, Dipasquale L, D’Ippolito G et al (2016) Model development and experimental validation of capnophilic lactic fermentation and hydrogen synthesis by Thermotoga neapolitana. Water Res 99:225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.04.063
Shi X, Jin D, Sun Q, Li W (2010) Optimization of conditions for hydrogen production from brewery wastewater by anaerobic sludge using desirability function approach. Renew Energy 35:1493–1498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2010.01.003
Wang J, Wan W (2009) Kinetic models for fermentative hydrogen production: A review. Int J Hydrogen Energy 34:3313–3323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.02.031
Wang J, Wan W (2008) The effect of substrate concentration on biohydrogen production by using kinetic models. Sci China Ser B Chem 51:1110–1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11426-008-0104-6
Zwietering MH, Jongenburger I, Rombouts FM, Van’t Riet K, (1990) Modeling of the bacterial growth curve. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:1875–1881. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.56.6.1875-1881.1990
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Iranian Research Organization for Science and Technology (IROST) (Grant No. 1012195020).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Boshagh, F., Rostami, K. Kinetic models of biological hydrogen production by Enterobacter aerogenes. Biotechnol Lett 43, 435–443 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-020-03051-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-020-03051-4