, Volume 25, Issue 12, pp 7065–7078 | Cite as

Enzyme-assisted mechanical grinding for cellulose nanofibers from bagasse: energy consumption and nanofiber characteristics

  • Xiuyu Liu
  • Yan Jiang
  • Chengrong Qin
  • Shuang Yang
  • Xueping SongEmail author
  • Shuangfei Wang
  • Kecheng Li
Original Paper


Bagasse fibers are smaller and have more hemicellulose than softwood fibers, which is expected to require less mechanical energy in cellulose nanofiber production as small size and hemicellulose benefit the disintegration of fibrils during a mechanical process. Both bagasse fibers and softwood fibers were used in this investigation for producing nanofibers with enzyme pretreatment followed by mechanical grinding. Results showed that nanofibers from bagasse had more uniform diameters about 9 nm, and the films made from them were more transparent. Grinding energy consumption of bagasse fibers was significantly lower than softwood, by 7.31%, and enzyme pretreatment further improved the energy efficiency, by 59.71%, and the yield of nanofibers, by 30.57%. The mechanical strength and thermal stability of nanofiber films from bagasse fibers were similar with that from softwood fibers. The results support the idea that bagasse, a waste or byproduct from sugar industry can be a promising alternative for nanofiber production.

Graphical abstract


Bagasse cellulose nanofibers Energy consumption Enzyme pretreatment Ultrafine grinding 



The authors thank the Project for Graduate Study Overseas of Guangxi University and China Scholarship Council under Grant No. 201706660011 for research assistance. The research is sponsored by the Innovation Project of Guangxi Graduate Education (YCBZ2018016), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21766002), the Scientific Research Foundation of Guangxi University (XTZ140551), and the Foundation of Guangxi Key Laboratory of Clean Pulp &Papermaking and Pollution Control (KF201606 and ZR201603).


  1. Alemdar A, Sain M (2008) Isolation and characterization of nanofibers from agricultural residues: wheat straw and soy hulls. Bioresour Technol 99:1664–1671. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrady AL (2008) Science and technology of polymer nanofibers. John Wiley & Sons Inc, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Besbes I, Vilar MR, Boufi S (2011) Nanofibrillated cellulose from alfa, eucalyptus and pine fibres: preparation, characteristics and reinforcing potential. Carbohyd Polym 86:1198–1206. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bian H, Gao Y, Wang R, Liu Z, Wu W, Dai H (2018a) Contribution of lignin to the surface structure and physical performance of cellulose nanofibrils film. Cellulose 25:1309–1318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bian H, Gao Y, Yang Y, Fang G, Dai H (2018b) Improving cellulose nanofibrillation of waste wheat straw using the combined methods of prewashing, p-toluenesulfonic acid hydrolysis, disk grinding, and endoglucanase post-treatment. Bioresour Technol 256:321–327. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chaker A, Alila S, Mutje P, Vilar MR, Boufi S (2013) Key role of the hemicellulose content and the cell morphology on the nanofibrillation effectiveness of cellulose pulps. Cellulose 20:2863–2875. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaker A, Mutje P, Vilar MR, Boufi S (2014) Agriculture crop residues as a source for the production of nanofibrillated cellulose with low energy demand. Cellulose 21:4247–4259. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chancelier L, Diallo AO, Santini CC, Marlair G, Gutel T, Mailley S, Len C (2014) Targeting adequate thermal stability and fire safety in selecting ionic liquid-based electrolytes for energy storage. Phys Chem Chem Phys 16:1967–1976. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen Y, He Y, Fan D, Han Y, Li G, Wang S (2017) An Efficient Method for Cellulose Nanofibrils Length Shearing via Environmentally Friendly Mixed Cellulase Pretreatment Journal of Nanomaterials 2017:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke K, Li X, Li K (2011) The mechanism of fiber cutting during enzymatic hydrolysis of wood biomass. Biomass Bioenerg 35:3943–3950. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Campos A et al (2013) Obtaining nanofibers from curauá and sugarcane bagasse fibers using enzymatic hydrolysis followed by sonication. Cellulose 20:1491–1500. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eichhorn SJ et al (2009) Review: current international research into cellulose nanofibres and nanocomposites. J Mater Sci 45:1–33. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feng YH, Cheng TY, Yang WG, Ma PT, He HZ, Yin XC, Yu XX (2018) Characteristics and environmentally friendly extraction of cellulose nanofibrils from sugarcane bagasse. Ind Crop Prod 111:285–291. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Filson PB, Dawson-Andoh BE, Schwegler-Berry D (2009) Enzymatic-mediated production of cellulose nanocrystals from recycled pulp. Green Chem 11:1808–1814. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freywyssling A, Muhlethaler K (1963) Die elementarfibrillen der cellulose Makromolekulare Chemie 62:25–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fu J et al (2016a) A flexible solid-state electrolyte for wide-scale integration of rechargeable zinc-air batteries. Energy Environ Sci 9:663–670. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fu K et al (2016b) Flexible, solid-state, ion-conducting membrane with 3D garnet nanofiber networks for lithium batteries. P Natl Acad Sci USA 113:7094–7099. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Henriksson M, Berglund LA, Isaksson P, Lindstrom T, Nishino T (2008) Cellulose nanopaper structures of high toughness Biomacromolecules 9:1579–1585. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang J, Zhu HL, Chen YC, Preston C, Rohrbach K, Cumings J, Hu LB (2013) Highly transparent and flexible nanopaper transistors. ACS Nano 7:2106–2113. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Isogai A, Saito T, Fukuzumi H (2011) TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers. Nanoscale 3:71–85. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Iwamoto S, Abe K, Yano H (2008) The effect of hemicelluloses on wood pulp nanofibrillation and nanofiber network characteristics. Biomacromol 9:1022–1026. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Khristova P, Kordsachia O, Patt R, Karar I, Khider T (2006) Environmentally friendly pulping and bleaching of bagasse. Ind Crop Prod 23:131–139. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li X, Clarke K, Li K, Chen A (2012) The pattern of cell wall deterioration in lignocellulose fibers throughout enzymatic cellulose hydrolysis. Biotechnol Progr 28:1389–1399. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Long L, Tian D, Hu J, Wang F, Saddler J (2017) A xylanase-aided enzymatic pretreatment facilitates cellulose nanofibrillation. Bioresour Technol 243:898–904. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mao LS, Ma P, Law K, Daneault C, Brouillette F (2010) Studies on kinetics and reuse of spent Liquor in the TEMPO-mediated selective oxidation of mechanical pulp. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:113–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Missoum K, Belgacem MN, Bras J (2013) Nanofibrillated cellulose surface modification: a Review. Materials 6:1745–1766. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Moon RJ, Martini A, Nairn J, Simonsen J, Youngblood J (2011) Cellulose nanomaterials review: structure, properties and nanocomposites. Chem Soc Rev 40:3941–3994. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Nair SS, Yan N (2015) Effect of high residual lignin on the thermal stability of nanofibrils and its enhanced mechanical performance in aqueous environments. Cellulose 22:3137–3150. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nechyporchuk O, Belgacem MN, Bras J (2016) Production of cellulose nanofibrils: a review of recent advances. Ind Crop Prod 93:2–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nogi M, Iwamoto S, Nakagaito AN, Yano H (2009) Optically transparent nanofiber paper. Adv Mater 21:1595–1598. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paakko M et al (2007) Enzymatic hydrolysis combined with mechanical shearing and high-pressure homogenization for nanoscale cellulose fibrils and strong gels. Biomacromol 8:1934–1941. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pandey A, Soccol CR, Nigam P, Soccol VT (2000) Biotechnological potential of agro-industrial residues. I: sugarcane bagasse. Bioresour Technol 74:69–80. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Petroudy SRD, Syverud K, Chinga-Carrasco G, Ghasemain A, Resalati H (2014) Effects of bagasse microfibrillated cellulose and cationic polyacrylamide on key properties of bagasse paper. Carbohyd Polym 99:311–318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Qing Y, Sabo R, Zhu JY, Agarwal U, Cai Z, Wu Y (2013) A comparative study of cellulose nanofibrils disintegrated via multiple processing approaches. Carbohydr Polym 97:226–234. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rajinipriya M, Nagalakshmaiah M, Robert M, Elkoun S (2018) Importance of agricultural and industrial waste in the field of nanocellulose and recent industrial developments of wood based nanocellulose: a Review. ASC Sustain Chem Eng 6:2807–2828. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rambabu N, Panthapulakkal S, Sain M, Dalai AK (2016) Production of nanocellulose fibers from pinecone biomass: evaluation and optimization of chemical and mechanical treatment conditions on mechanical properties of nanocellulose films. Ind Crop Prod 83:746–754. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sacui IA et al (2014) Comparison of the properties of cellulose nanocrystals and cellulose nanofibrils isolated from bacteria, tunicate, and wood processed using acid, enzymatic, mechanical, and oxidative methods. ACS Appl Mater Inter 6:6127–6138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Saelee K, Yingkamhaeng N, Nimchua T, Sukyai P (2016a) An environmentally friendly xylanase-assisted pretreatment for cellulose nanofibrils isolation from sugarcane bagasse by high-pressure homogenization. Ind Crops Prod 82:149–160. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saelee K, Yingkamhaeng N, Nimchua T, Sukyai P (2016b) An environmentally friendly xylanase-assisted pretreatment for cellulose nanofibrils isolation from sugarcane bagasse by high-pressure homogenization. Ind Crop Prod 82:149–160. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saito T, Kimura S, Nishiyama Y, Isogai A (2007) Cellulose nanofibers prepared by TEMPO-mediated oxidation of native cellulose. Biomacromol 8:2485–2491. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Segal L, Creely JJ, Martin AE, Conrad CM (1959) An empirical method for estimating the degree of crystallinity of native cellulose using the X-Ray diffractometer. RES J 29:786–794Google Scholar
  43. Serra A, González I, Oliver-Ortega H, Tarrès Q, Delgado-Aguilar M, Mutjé P (2017) Reducing the amount of catalyst in TEMPO-oxidized cellulose nanofibers: effect on properties and cost. Polymers 9:557. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stelte W, Sanadi AR (2009) Preparation and characterization of cellulose nanofibers from two commercial hardwood and softwood pulps. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:11211–11219. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tejado A, Alam MN, Antal M, Yang H, van de Ven TGM (2012) Energy requirements for the disintegration of cellulose fibers into cellulose nanofibers. Cellulose 19:831–842. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Testa ML, Ciriminna R, Hajji C, Garcia EZ, Ciclosi M, Arques JS, Pagliaro M (2004) Oxidation of amino diols mediated by homogeneous and heterogeneous TEMPO. Adv Synth & Catal 346:655–660. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wang W, Mozuch MD, Sabo RC, Kersten P, Zhu JY, Jin Y (2014) Production of cellulose nanofibrils from bleached eucalyptus fibers by hyperthermostable endoglucanase treatment and subsequent microfluidization. Cellulose 22:351–361. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang W, Sabo RC, Mozuch MD, Kersten P, Zhu JY, Jin Y (2015) Physical and mechanical properties of cellulose nanofibril films from bleached eucalyptus pulp by endoglucanase treatment and microfluidization. J Polym Environ 23:551–558. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wood TM, Bhat KM (1988) Methods for measuring cellulase activities. In: Methods in enzymology, vol 160. Academic Press, pp 87–112. doi: Google Scholar
  50. Wu W, Tassi NG, Zhu H, Fang Z, Hu L (2015) Nanocellulose-based translucent diffuser for optoelectronic device applications with dramatic improvement of light coupling. ACS Appl Mater Inter 7:26860–26864. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yang WS, Jiao L, Min DY, Liu ZL, Dai HQ (2017) Effects of preparation approaches on optical properties of self-assembled cellulose nanopapers. RSC Adv 7:10463–10468. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yang S, Xie QX, Liu XY, Wu M, Wang SF, Song XP (2018) Acetylation improves thermal stability and transmittance in FOLED substrates based on nanocellulose films. RSC Adv 8:3619–3625. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang J et al (2016) Laminated cross-linked nanocellulose/graphene oxide electrolyte for flexible rechargeable Zinc-Air batteries. Adv Energy Mater. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang Z et al (2017a) New transparent flexible nanopaper as ultraviolet filter based on red emissive Eu(III) nanofibrillated cellulose. Opt Mater 73:747–753. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang Z et al (2017b) Near-infrared and visible dual emissive transparent nanopaper based on Yb(III)–carbon quantum dots grafted oxidized nanofibrillated cellulose for anti-counterfeiting applications. Cellulose 25:377–389. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zimmermann T, Bordeanu N, Strub E (2010) Properties of nanofibrillated cellulose from different raw materials and its reinforcement potential. Carbohyd Polym 79:1086–1093. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Light Industry and Food EngineeringGuangxi UniversityNanningPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Guangxi Key Laboratory of Clean Pulp & Papermaking and Pollution ControlNanningPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of Chemical and Paper EngineeringWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations