Journal of Applied Phycology

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 2089–2098 | Cite as

Statistical optimization of fermentable sugar extraction from the Malaysian brown alga Sargassum binderi

  • Siew-Ling Hii
  • Kong-Fai Lip
  • Yoon-Tim Loh
  • Ching-Lee Wong
5th congress of the international society for applied phycology
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Statistical optimisation techniques were applied in the present study to extract fermentable sugar (FS) from indigenous brown seaweed, Sargassum binderi. As identified by the Plackett–Burman design (PBD) with five variables, the most significant parameters (p < 0.05) affecting sugar yield were pretreatment temperature, concentration of sulphuric acid (H2SO4) used during pretreatment, and loading of enzyme cellulase during hydrolysis process. Upon this, the extraction of FS from S. binderi was further optimized with central composite design (CCD) by using response surface methodology (RSM). Analysis of variance revealed that every independent variable in the present study possesses significant positive effect towards the yield of FS. In addition, interactions among the independent variables were observed as well. The model proposed in this study fits significantly well to the experimental data with more than 95 % confidence. The optimal condition as proposed by the cubic model for maximum yield of FS was found as follows: pretreatment of S. binderi with 6.38 % of dilute H2SO4 at 120.7 °C, followed by hydrolysis using 0.16 mL of cellulase loading per unit gram of pretreated dry seaweed. The results of validation experiments gave FS yield of 1.69 g g−1 which fitted well with predicted value by RSM (1.72 g g−1). The overall error was small indicating the proficiency of the models in optimizing extraction of FS from S. binderi. The present study indicated that the brown seaweed S. binderi has potential to become a dependable biomass source for production of value added products.

Keywords

Central composite design Fermentable sugars Optimisation Response surface methodology Sargassum binderi Phaeophyceae 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) Malaysia and Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia for funding (Project #: ERGS/1/11/TK/UTAR/02/5) and technical supports for this research.

References

  1. Adams JM, Gallagher JA, Donnison IS (2009) Fermentation study on Saccharina latissima for bioethanol production considering variable pre-treatments. J Appl Phycol 21:569–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams JM, Schmidt A, Gallagher JA (2014) The impact of sample preparation of the macroalgae Laminaria digitata on the production of the biofuels bioethanol and biomethane. J Appl Phycol. doi: 10.1007/s10811-014-0368-5 Google Scholar
  3. Adinarayana K, Ellaiah P (2002) Response surface optimization of the critical medium components for the production of alkaline protease by a newly isolate Bacillus sp. J Pharm Pharm Sci 5:272–278PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson MK, Whitcomb PJ (2007) DOE simplified: Practical tools for effective experimentation, 2nd edn. Productivity Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Arthur RP, Wang Z, Keshwani DR, Cheng JJ (2011) High temperature dilute acid pretreatment of coastal Bermuda grass. Bioresource Technol 102:1415–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banerjee U, Chisti Y, Young M (1995) Effects of substrate particle size and alkaline pretreatment on protein enrichment by Neurospora sitophilia. Resour Conserv Recy 13:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borines MG, Rizalinda L, de Leon RL, Cuello JL (2013) Bioethanol production from the macroalgae Sargassum spp. Bioresource Technol 138:22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burman J, Plackett R (1946) The design of optimum multifactorial experiments. Biogeosci 33:305–325Google Scholar
  9. Chang VS, Holtzapple MT (2000) Fundamental factors affecting biomass enzymatic reactivity. Appl Biochem Biotech 84:5–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chirapart A, Praiboon J, Puangsombat P, Pattanapon C, Nunraksa N (2014) Chemical composition and ethanol production potential of Thai seaweed species. J Appl Phycol 26:979–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cui FJ, Li Y, Xu ZH, Xu HY, Sun K, Tao WY (2006) Optimization of the medium composition for the production of mycelial biomas and exo-polymer by Grifola frondosa GF 9801 using response surface methodology. Bioresource Technol 97:1209–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis TA, Volesky B, Mucci A (2003) A review of the biochemistry of heavy metal biosorption by brown algae. Water Res 37:4311–4330CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Eslahi N, Dadashian F, Nejad NH (2013) Optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis of wool fibers for nanoparticles production using response surface methodology. Adv Powder Technol 24:416–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esteghlalian A, Hashimoto AG, Fenske JJ, Penner MH (1997) Modeling and optimization of the dilute-sulfuric-acid pretreatment of corn stover, poplar and switchgrass. Bioresource Technol 59:129–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harmsen P, Huijgen WJJ, Bermudez Lopez LM, Bakker RRC (2010) Literature review of physical and chemical pretreatment processes for lignocellulosic biomass. Wageningen UR Food and Biobased Research. Wageningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  16. Horn SJ, Aasen IM, Ostgaard K (2000) Ethanol production from seaweed extract. J Ind Microbiol Biot 25:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hounsa CG, Aubry JM, Dubourguier HC, Hornez JP (1996) Application of factorial and Doehlert designs for optimization of pectate lyase production by a recombinant Escherichia coli. Appl Microbiol Biot 45:764–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. International Energy Agency (2012) Oil. Retrieved from http://www.iea.org/aboutus/faqs/oil/ on 25 July 2012.
  19. Jin T, Wang H, Wang J, Mou H (2014) Ethanol production from kelp slag hydrolysates using genetically engineered Escherichia coli KO11. J Appl Phycol. doi: 10.1007/s10811-014-0413-4:1-10 Google Scholar
  20. John RP, Anisha GS, Nampoothiri KM, Pandey A (2011) Micro and macroalgal biomass: a renewable source for bioethanol. Bioresource Technol 102:186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Karunanithy C, Muthukumarappanm K (2010) Optimization of switchgrass and extruder parameters for enzymatic hydrolysis using response surface methodology. Ind Crop Prod 33:188–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Khambathy Y, Mody K, Gandhi MR, Thampy S, Maiti P, Brahmbhatt H, Eswaran K, Ghosh PK (2012) Kappaphycus alvarezii as a source of bioethanol. Bioresource Technol 103:180–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim JK (2008) Statistical optimization of enzymatic saccharification and ethanol fermentation using food waste. Process Biochem 43:1308–1312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kim HM, Wi SG, Jung S, Song Y, Bae HJ (2015) Efficient approach for bioethanol production from red seaweed Gelidium amansii. Bioresource Technol 175:128–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kraan S (2008) Sargassum muticum (Yendo) Fensholt in Ireland: an invasive species on the move. J Appl Phycol 20:825–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Krassig HA (1993) Cellulose: Structure, accessibility and reactivity. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, YverdonGoogle Scholar
  27. Krishnan S, Prapulla S, Rajalakshmi D, Misra M, Karanth N (1998) Screening and selection of media components for lactic acid production using Plackett-Burman design. Bioprocess Eng 19:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuila A, Singh A, Mukhopadhyay M, Banerjee R (2010) Process optimization for aqueous extraction of reducing sugar from cashew apple bagasse: A potential, low cost substrate. LWT Food Sci Technol 44:62–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kumar P (2009) Methods for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for efficient hydrolysis and biofuel production. Ind Eng Chem Res 48:3713–3729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee SL, Chen WC (1997) Optimization of medium composition for the production of glucosyltransferase by Aspergillus niger with response surface methodology. Enzym Microb Tech 21:436–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Linko P, Mattson C, Linko YY, Antila J (1984) Production of fat bread by continuous extrusion cooking from high alpha-amylase. J Cereal Sci 2:43–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Logothetis N, Wynn HP (1989) Quality through design. Oxford Science, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Mcintosh S, Vancov T (2011) Optimisation of dilute alkaline pretreatment for enzymatic saccharification of wheat straw. Biomass Bioenerg 35:3094–3103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meinita MDN, Kang J-Y, Jeong G-T, Koo HM, Park SM, Hong Y-K (2012) Bioethanol production from the acid hydrolysate of the carrageenophyte Kappaphycus alvarezii (cottonii). J Appl Phycol 24:857–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meinita MDN, Marhaeni B, Winanto T, Jeong G-T, Khan MNA, Hong Y-K (2013) Comparison of agarophytes (Gelidium, Gracilaria, and Gracilariopsis) as potential resources for bioethanol production. J Appl Phycol 25:1957–1961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meyer RH, Montgomery DC, Anderson-Cook CM (2009) Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed Experiments. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller GL (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal Chem 31:426–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mosier N, Wyman C, Dale B, Elander R, Lee YY, Holtzapple M, Ladisch M (2005) Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresource Technol 96:673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mutripah S, Meinita MDM, Kang J-Y, Jeong G-T, Susanto AB, Prabowo RE, Hong Y-K (2014) Bioethanol production from the hydrolysate of Palmaria palmata using sulfuric acid and fermentation with brewer’s yeast. J Appl Phycol 26:687–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Percival E, McDowell RH (1967) Chemistry and enzymology of marine algal polysaccharides. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Rajendiran R, Gayathri Devi S, Suresh Kumar B, Arul Priya V (2011) Screening of process variables for the production of extracellular lipase from palm oil by Trichoderma viride using Plackett-Burman design. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 75:743–746Google Scholar
  42. Roesijadi G, Copping AE, Huesemann MH, Forster J, Benemann JR (2008) Techno-economic feasibility analysis of offshore seaweed farming for bioenergy and biobased products. Battelle Pacific Northwest Division Report Number PNWD-3931Google Scholar
  43. Schell DJ, Farmer J, Newman M, McMillan JD (2003) Dilute-sulfuric acid pretreatment of corn stover in pilot-scale reactor - investigation of yields, kinetics, and enzymatic digestibilities of solids. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 105:69–85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Sun Y, Cheng J (2005) Dilute acid pretreatment of rye straw and bermudagrass for ethanol production. Bioresource Technol 96:1599–1606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trivedi N, Gupta V, Reddy CRK, Jha B (2013) Enzymatic hydrolysis and production of bioethanol from common macrophytic green alga Ulva fasciata Delile. Bioresource Technol 150:106–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang X, Liu X, Wang G (2011) Two-stage hydrolysis of invasive algal feedstock for ethanol production. J Integr Plant Biol 53:246–252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wi SG, Kim HJ, Mahadevan SA, Yang DJ, Bae HJ (2009) The potential value of the seaweed Ceylon moss (Gelidium amansii) as an alternative bioenergy resource. Bioresource Technol 100:6658–6660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yoon JJ, Kim YJ, Kim SH, Ryu HJ, Choi JY, Kim GS, Shin MK (2010) Production of polysaccharides and corresponding sugars from red seaweed. Adv Mater Res 93–94:463–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhang B, Shahzabi A, Wang L, Diallo O, Whitemore A (2011) Hot-water pretreatment of cattails for extraction of cellulose. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 3:819–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siew-Ling Hii
    • 1
  • Kong-Fai Lip
    • 1
  • Yoon-Tim Loh
    • 1
  • Ching-Lee Wong
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and ScienceUniversiti Tunku Abdul RahmanKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.Taylor’s UniversitySubang JayaMalaysia

Personalised recommendations