Advertisement

Wood Science and Technology

, Volume 49, Issue 5, pp 1037–1054 | Cite as

Implications of differences in macromolecular composition of stem fractions for processing of Scots pine

  • Sara Johansson
  • Karin Carlqvist
  • Rashmi Kataria
  • Thomas Ulvcrona
  • Urban Bergsten
  • Mehrdad Arshadi
  • Mats Galbe
  • Gunnar LidénEmail author
Original

Abstract

Use of wood feedstocks for sugar-based biorefineries requires suitable treatments of the various tree fractions to optimize yields. In the current study, stem wood fractions (sapwood, heartwood and knotwood) were sampled at different heights from well-documented Scots pine trees taken from two contrasting stands. The fractions were assessed in terms of chemical composition, response to SO2-catalysed steam pretreatment and enzymatic digestibility. There were significant differences in total extractive contents between the fractions, where the heartwood fractions had an extractive content 1–3 wt% higher than sapwood (corresponding to a relative increase of 20–60 %) for samples at the same height. In contrast, the differences in macromolecular carbohydrate contents between the fractions were smaller and mainly insignificant. One exception was the xylan content, which was higher in heartwood than in sapwood at the same tree height (a relative difference of 10–15 %). Steam pretreatment resulted in a clearly higher degree of hydrolysis for sapwood than for heartwood at the same conditions. However, at optimal pretreatment temperatures a higher total sugar yield was in fact obtained for heartwood, showing the importance of tuning the process conditions for the respective wood fractions.

Keywords

Lignin Xylose Hemicellulose Glucan Furfural 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for financial support from the Bo Rydin Foundation for Scientific Research to the project TALLRAFF.

References

  1. Almeida JRM, Bertilsson M, Gorwa-Grauslund MF, Gorsich S, Liden G (2009) Metabolic effects of furaldehydes and impacts on biotechnological processes. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 82:625–638PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvira P, Tomás-Pejó E, Ballesteros M, Negro MJ (2010) Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: a review. Bioresour Technol 101:4851–4861PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arshadi M, Backlund I, Geladi P, Bergsten U (2013) Comparison of fatty and resin acid composition in boreal lodgepole pine and Scots pine for biorefinery applications. Ind Crops Prod 49:535–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett JR, Bonham VA (2004) Cellulose microfibril angle in the cell wall of wood fibres. Biol Rev 79:461–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertaud F, Holmbom B (2004) Chemical composition of earlywood and latewood in Norway spruce heartwood, sapwood and transition zone wood. Wood Sci Technol 38:245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Björklund Jansson M, Nilvebrant N-O (2009) Wood extractives. In: Ek M, Gellerstedt G, Henriksson G (eds) Pulp and paper chemistry and Technology. Wood chemistry and wood biotechnology, vol 1. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 147–171Google Scholar
  7. Bondesson P-M, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2014) Comparison of energy potentials from combined ethanol and methane production using steam-pretreated corn stover impregnated with acetic acid. Biomass Bioenergy 67:413–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Börjesson J, Engqvist M, Sipos B, Tjerneld F (2007) Effect of poly(ethylene glycol) on enzymatic hydrolysis and adsorption of cellulase enzymes to pretreated lignocellulose. Enzyme Microb Technol 41:186–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boussaid A-L, Esteghlalian AR, Gregg DJ, Lee KH, Saddler JN (2000) Steam pretreatment of Douglas-fir wood chips. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 84–86:693–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark TA, Mackie KL (2007) Steam explosion of the softwood pinus radiata with sulphur dioxide addition. I. Process optimisation. J Wood Chem Technol 7:373–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeMartini JD, Wyman CE (2011) Changes in composition and sugar release across the annual rings of populus wood and implications on recalcitrance. Bioresour Technol 102:1352–1358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ewanick SM, Bura R, Saddler JN (2007) Acid-catalyzed steam pretreatment of lodgepole pine and subsequent enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation to ethanol. Biotechnol Bioeng 98:737–746PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galbe M, Zacchi G (2012) Pretreatment: the key to efficient utilization of lignocellulosic materials. Biomass Bioenergy 46:70–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gjerdrum P (2003) Heartwood in relation to age and growth rate in Pinus sylvestris L. in Scandinavia. Forestry 76:413–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamilton JK, Partlow EV, Thompson NS (1960) The nature of a galactoglucomannan associated with wood cellulose from southern pine. J Am Chem Soc 82:451–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henriksson G, Brännvall E, Lennholm H (2009) Wood chemistry and wood biotechnology. In: Ek M, Gellerstedt G, Henriksson G (eds) Wood chem biotechnol. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 13–44Google Scholar
  17. Hillis WE (1987) Heartwood and tree exudates. Springer, Berlin (268 pp) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Janssen R, Turhollow AF, Rutz D, Mergner R (2013) Production facilities for second-generation biofuels in the USA and the EU—current status and future perspectives. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefining 7:647–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jozsa LA, Middleton GR (1994) A discussion of wood quality attributes and their practical implications. Canadian forest service publications special publication No. SP-34Google Scholar
  20. Kamm B, Kamm M (2007) Biorefineries-multi product processes. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 105:175–204PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lynd LR, Wyman C, Laser M, Johnson D, Landucci R (2005) Strategic biorefinery analysis: analysis of biorefineries. Subcontract report NREL/SR-510-35578Google Scholar
  22. Mäki-Arvela P, Salminen E, Riittonen T, Virtanen P, Kumar N, Mikkola J-P (2012) The challenge of efficient synthesis of biofuels from lignocellulose for future renewable transportation fuels. Int J Chem Eng. doi: 10.1155/2012/674761 Google Scholar
  23. Monavari S, Galbe M, Zacchi G (2009) Impact of impregnation time and chip size on sugar yield in pretreatment of softwood for ethanol production. Bioresour Technol 100:6312–6316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nilsson P, Cory N, Fridman J, Kempe G (2013) Forest statistics 2013: Official Statistics of Sweden. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, UmeåGoogle Scholar
  25. Normark M, Winestrand S, Lestander TA, Jönsson LJ (2014) Analysis, pretreatment and enzymatic saccharification of different fractions of Scots pine. BMC Biotechnol 14:20PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000) Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. Bioresour Technol 74:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Puentes Rodriguez Y, Puhakka-Tarvainen H, Pastinen O, Siika-aho M, Alvila L, Turunen O, Morales L, Pappinen A (2012) Susceptibility of pretreated wood sections of Norway spruce (Picea abies) clones to enzymatic hydrolysis. Can J For Res 42:38–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ragauskas AJ, Nagy M, Kim DH, Eckert CA, Hallett JP, Liotta CL (2006) From wood to fuels: integrating biofuels and pulp production. Ind Biotechnol 2:55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Robinson J, Keating JD, Boussaid A, Mansfield S, Saddler J (2002) The influence of bark on the fermentation of Douglas-fir whitewood pre-hydrolysates. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 59:443–448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saeman JF (1945) Kinetics of wood saccharification-hydrolysis of cellulose and decomposition of sugars in dilute acid at high temperature. Ind Eng Chem 37:43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sannigrahi P, Kim DH, Jung S, Ragauskas A (2011) Pseudo-lignin and pretreatment chemistry. Energy Environ Sci 4:1306–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sjöström E (1993) Wood chemistry: fundamentals and application. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  33. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2008a) Determination of sugars, byproducts, and degradation products in liquid Fraction process samples. Technical report NREL/TP-510-42623Google Scholar
  34. Sluiter A, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2008b) Determination of extractives in biomass. Technical report NREL/TP-510-42619Google Scholar
  35. Sluiter A, Crocker D, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D (2008c) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass. Technical report NREL/TP-510-42618Google Scholar
  36. Söderholm P, Lundmark R (2009) Forest-based biorefineries: implications for market behavior and policy. For Prod J 59:6–16Google Scholar
  37. Stenberg K, Tengborg C, Galbe M, Zacchi G (1998) Optimisation of steam pretreatment of SO2-impregnated mixed softwoods for ethanol production. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 71:299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Teleman A (2009) Hemicelluloses and pectins. In: Ek M, Gellerstedt G, Henriksson G (eds) Wood chem wood biotechnol. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 101–120Google Scholar
  39. Weiss ND, Stickel JJ, Wolfe JL, Nguyen QA (2010) A simplified method for the measurement of insoluble solids in pretreated biomass slurries. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 162:975–987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Willför S, Holmbom B (2004) Isolation and characterisation of water soluble polysaccharides from Norway spruce and Scots pine. Wood Sci Technol 38:173–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Willför S, Sundberg A, Hemming J, Holmbom B (2005a) Polysaccharides in some industrially important softwood species. Wood Sci Technol 39:245–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Willför S, Sundberg A, Rehn P, Holmbom BR, Saranpää PT (2005b) Distribution of lignans in knots and adjacent stemwood of Picea abies. Holz Roh-Werkst 63:353–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wiman M, Dienes D, Hansen M, van der Meulen T, Zacchi G, Liden G (2012) Cellulose accessibility determines the rate of enzymatic hydrolysis of steam-pretreated spruce. Bioresour Technol 126:208–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xu Z, Huang F (2014) Pretreatment methods for bioethanol production. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 174:43–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhang C, Lei X, Scott CT, Zhu JY, Li K (2014) Comparison of dilute acid and sulfite pretreatment for enzymatic saccharification of earlywood and latewood of Douglas fir. Bioenergy Res 7:362–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zobel BJ, van Buijtenen JP (1989) Wood Variation Its Causes and Control. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Johansson
    • 1
  • Karin Carlqvist
    • 1
  • Rashmi Kataria
    • 2
  • Thomas Ulvcrona
    • 2
    • 3
  • Urban Bergsten
    • 2
  • Mehrdad Arshadi
    • 2
  • Mats Galbe
    • 1
  • Gunnar Lidén
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringLund UniversityLundSweden
  2. 2.Department of Forest Biomaterials and TechnologySwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUmeåSweden
  3. 3.SCA Skog ABUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations