, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 743–762 | Cite as

Role of pretreatment and conditioning processes on toxicity of lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysates



The Department of Energy’s Office of the Biomass Program has set goals of making ethanol cost competitive by 2012 and replacing 30% of 2004 transportation supply with biofuels by 2030. Both goals require improvements in conversions of cellulosic biomass to sugars as well as improvements in fermentation rates and yields. Current best pretreatment processes are reasonably efficient at making the cellulose/hemicellulose/lignin matrix amenable to enzymatic hydrolysis and fermentation, but they release a number of toxic compounds into the hydrolysate which inhibit the growth and ethanol productivity of fermentation organisms. Conditioning methods designed to reduce the toxicity of hydrolysates are effective, but add to process costs and tend to reduce sugar yields, thus adding significantly to the final cost of production. Reducing the cost of cellulosic ethanol production will likely require enhanced understanding of the source and mode of action of hydrolysate toxic compounds, the means by which some organisms resist the actions of these compounds, and the methodology and mechanisms for conditioning hydrolysate to reduce toxicity. This review will provide an update on the state of knowledge in these areas and can provide insights useful for the crafting of hypotheses for improvements in pretreatment, conditioning, and fermentation organisms.


Lignocellulose Inhibitors Pretreatment Conditioning Hydrolysate Biofuel 


  1. Almeida JRM, Roder A et al (2008) NADH- vs NADPH-coupled reduction of 5-hydroxymethyl furfural (HMF) and its implications on product distribution in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechno 76:939–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alriksson B, Sarvari Horvath I et al (2005) Ammonium hydroxide detoxification of spruce acid hydrolysates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 121:911–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alriksson B, Sjode A et al (2006) Optimal conditions for alkaline detoxification of dilute-acid lignocellulose hydrolysates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129–132:599–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ando S, Arai I et al (1986) Identification of aromatic monomers in steam-exploded poplar and their influence on ethanol fermentation. J Ferment Technol 64:567–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Azzam AM (1989) Pretreatment of cane bagasse with alkaline hydrogen peroxide for enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose and ethanol fermentation. J Environ Sci Health B 24:421–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Banerjee N, Bhatnagar R et al (1981) Inhibition of glycolysis by furfural in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eur J Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 11:226–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berson RE, Young JS et al (2006) Reintroduced solids increase inhibitor levels in a pretreated corn stover hydrolysate. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129–132:612–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bjerre AB, Olesen AB et al (1996) Pretreatment of wheat straw using combined wet oxidation and alkaline hydrolysis resulting in convertible cellulose and hemicellulose. Biores Technol 49:568–577Google Scholar
  9. Brandberg T, Franzen CJ et al (2004) The fermentation performance of nine strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in batch and fed-batch cultures in dilute-acid wood hydrolysate. J Biosci Bioeng 98:122–125Google Scholar
  10. Cantarella M, Cantarella L et al (2004) Effect of inhibitors released during steam-explosion treatment of poplar wood on subsequent enzymatic hydrolysis and SSF. Biotechnol Prog 20:200–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen S-F, Mowery RA et al (2006) High-performance liquid chromatography method for simultaneous determination of aliphatic acid, aromatic acid and neutral degradation products in biomass pretreatment hydrolysates. J Chromatogr A 1104:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark TA, Mackie KL (1984) Fermentation inhibitors in wood hydrolysates derived from the softwood Pinus radiata. J Chem Tech Biotechnol 34B:101–110Google Scholar
  13. Clark TA, Mackie KL (1987) Steam explosion of the soft-wood Pinus radiata with sulfphur dioxide addition. I. Process optimization. J Wood Chem Technol 7:373–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dale BE, Moreira MJ (1982) A freeze-explosion technique for increasing cellulose hydrolysis. Biotechnol Bioeng Symp 12:31–43Google Scholar
  15. Delgenes JP, Moletta R et al (1996) Effects of lignocellulose degradation products on ethanol fermentations of glucose and xylose by Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Zymomonas mobilis, Pichia stipitis, and Candida shehatae. Enzyme Microb Technol 19:220–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. deMancilha IM, Karim MN (2003) Evaluation of ion exchange resins for removal of inhibitory compounds from corn stover hydrolyzate for xylitol fermentation. Biotechnol Prog 19:1837–1841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dowe N, Schell D et al. (2007) Identify best process configuration for achieving appropriate conversion of corn stover to sugars at bench scale that validate $0.125 per pound sugars. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/9928.doc
  18. Elander R, Ibsen K et al. (2002) Potential of various pretreatment technologies to meet 2010 pretreatment conversion goals. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/6646.pdf
  19. Evans K and Schell D (2006) Assess performance of best available microorganisms with potential to achieve high conversion yields. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/9822.doc
  20. Ezeji K, Qureshi N et al (2007) Butanol production from agricultural residues: impact of degradation products on Clostridium beijerinckii growth and butanol fermentation. Biotechnol Bioeng 97:1460–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fenske JJ, Griffin DA et al (1998) Comparison of aromatic monomers in lignocellulosic biomass prehydrolysates. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 20:364–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferrari MD, Neirotti E et al (1992) Ethanol production from Eucalyptus wood hemicellulose hydrolysate by Pichia stipitis. Biotechnol Bioeng 40:753–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Galbe M, Zacchi G (2002) A review of the production of ethanol from softwood. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 59:618–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gorsich S, Dien B et al (2006) Tolerance to furfural-induced stress is associated with pentose phosphate pathway genes ZWF1, GND1, RPE1, and TKL1 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 71:339–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grous WR, Converse AO et al (1986) Effect of steam explosion pretreatment on pore size and enzymatic hydrolysis of poplar. Enz Microb Technol 8:274–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gutierrez T, Ingram LO et al (2006) Purification and characterization of a furfural reductase (FFR) from Escherichia coli strain LYO1–An enzyme important in the detoxification of furfural during ethanol production. J Biotechnol 121:154–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heipieper JJ, Weber FJ et al (1994) Mechanism of resistance of whole cells to toxic organic solvents. TIBTECH 12:409–415Google Scholar
  28. Helle S, Cameron D et al (2003) Effect of inhibitory compounds found in biomass hydrolysates on growth and xylose fermentation by a genetically engineered strain of S. cerevisiae. Enz Microb Technol 33:786–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holtzapple MT, Jun JH et al (1991) The ammonia freeze explosion (AFEX) process: a practical lignocellulose pretreatment. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 28/29:59–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Horvath IS, Franzen CJ et al (2003) Effects of furfural on the respiratory metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in glucose-limited chemostats. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:4076–4086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Horvath IS, Sjode A et al (2004) Selection of anion exchangers for detoxification of dilute-acid hydrolysates from spruce. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 113–116:525–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jeffries T, Jin Y (2000) Ethanol and thermotolerance in the bioconversion of xylose by yeasts. Adv Appl Microbiol 47:221–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jennings E and Schell D (2005) Benchmark integrated process performance on corn stover. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/9384.doc
  34. Jennings E and Schell D (2006) Evaluate alternative conditioning technology with the potential to eliminate sugar losses. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/9777.doc
  35. Jonsson LJ, Palmqvist E et al (1998) Detoxification of wood hydrolysates with laccase and peroxidase from the white-rot fungus Trametes versicolor. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 49:691–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Keating JD, Panganiban C et al (2006) Tolerance and adaptation of ethanologenic yeasts to lignocellulosic inhibitory compounds. Biotechnol Bioeng 93:1196–1206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Klinke HB, Thomsen A et al (2001) Potential inhibitors from wet oxidation of wheat straw and their effect on growth and ethanol production by Thermoanaerobacter mathranii. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 57:631–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Klinke HB, Ahring BK et al (2002) Characterization of degradation products from alkaline wet oxidation of wheat straw. Biores Technol 82:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Klinke HB, Thomsen AB et al (2004) Inhibition of ethanol-producing yeast and bacteria by degradation products produced during pre-treatment of biomass. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 66:10–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Larsson S, Palmqvist E et al (1999) The generation of fermentation inhibitors during dilute acid hydrolysis of softwood. Enz Microb Technol 24:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Larsson S, Cassland P et al (2001) Development of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain with enhanced resistance to phenolic fermentation inhibitors in lignocellulose hydrolysates by heterologous expression of laccase. Appl Environ Microbiol 67:1163–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Liu Z (2006) Genomic adaptation of ethanologenic yeast to biomass conversion inhibitors. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 73:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Liu ZL, Slininger PJ et al (2004) Adaptive response of yeasts to furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and new chemical evidence for HMF conversion to 2, 5-bis-hydroxymethylfuran. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 31:345–352Google Scholar
  44. Liu Z, Slinginger PJ et al (2005) Enhanced biotransformation of furfural and hydroxymethylfurfural by newly developed ethanologenic yeast strains. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 121–124:451–460Google Scholar
  45. Lopez M, Nichols N et al (2004) Isolation of microorganisms for biological detoxification. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 64:125–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Luo C, Brink DL et al (2002) Identification of potential fermentation inhibitors in conversion of hybrid poplar hydrolyzate to ethanol. Biomass Bioenergy 22:125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mohagheghi A, Evans K et al (2002) Cofermentation of glucose, xylose, and arabinose by genomic DNA-integrated xylose-arabinose fermenting strain of Zymonomas mobilis AX101. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 98–100:885–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mohagheghi A, Ruth M et al (2006) Conditioning hemicellulose hydrolysates for fermentation: effects of overliming pH on sugar and ethanol yields. Process Biochem 41:1806–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mosier N, Wyman C et al (2005) Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Biores Technol 96:673–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mussatto SI, Roberto IC (2004) Alternatives for detoxification of diluted-acid lignocellulosic hydrolyzates for use in fermentative processes: a review. Biores Technol 93:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nagle N, Weiss N et al. (2006) Complete study on relative effect of pretreatment conditions on switchgrass and wheat straw, spanning a wide pH range of pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis conditions. http://devafdc.nrel.gov/bcfcdoc/9658.doc
  52. Nichols NN, Dien BS et al (2005) Bioabatement to remove inhibitors from biomass-derived sugar hydrolysates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 121–124:379–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nigam JN (2001) Development of xylose-fermenting yeast Pichia stipitis for ethanol production through adaptation on hardwood hemicellulose prehydrolysate. J Appl Microbiol 90:208–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nilsson A, Gorwa-Grauslund M et al (2005) Cofactor dependence in furan reduction by Saccharomyces cerevisiae in fermentation of acid-hydrolyzed lignocellulose. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:7866–7871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nilvebrant NO, Reimann A et al (2001) Detoxification of lignocellulose hydrolysates with ion exchange resins. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 91–93:35–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nilvebrant NO, Persson P et al (2003) Limits for alkaline detoxification of dilute-acid lignocellulose hydrolysates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 105–108:615–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Okuda N, Soneura M et al (2008) Biological detoxification of waste house wood hydrolysate using Ureibacillus thermosphaericus for bioethanol production. J Biosci Bioeng 106:128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000a) Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. Biores Technol 74:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000b) Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: inhibition and detoxification. Biores Technol 74:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Palmqvist E, Grage H et al (1999) Main and interaction effects of acetic acid, furfural, and p-hydroxybenzoic acid on growth and ethanol productivity of yeasts. Biotechnol Bioeng 63:46–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Parekh SR, Yu S et al (1986) Adaptation of Candida shehatae and Pichia stipitis to wood hydrolysates for increased ethanol production. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 25:300–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Persson P, Andersson J et al (2002a) Effect of different forms of alkali treatment on specific fermentation inhibitors and on the fermentability of lignocellulose hydrolysates for production of fuel ethanol. J Agric Food Chem 50:5318–5325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Persson P, Larsson S et al (2002b) Supercritical fluid extraction of a lignocellulosic hydrolysate of spruce for detoxification and to facilitate analysis of inhibitors. Biotechnol Bioeng 79:694–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Petersson A, Almeida JRM et al (2006) A 5-hydroxymethyl furfural reducing enzyme encoded by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ADH6 gene conveys HMF tolerance. Yeast 23:455–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Phowchinda O, Delia-Dupuy ML et al (1995) Effects of acetic acid on growth and fermentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Lett 17:237–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Purwadi R, Niklasson C et al (2004) Kinetic study of detoxification of dilute-acid hydrolyzates by Ca(OH)2. J Biotechnol 114:187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ranatunga TD, Jervis J et al (1997a) Identification of inhibitory components toxic toward Zymomonas mobilis CPR(pZB5) xylose fermentation. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 67:185–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ranatunga TD, Jervis J et al (1997b) Toxicity of hardwood extractives toward Saccharomyces cerevisiae glucose fermentation. Biotechnol Lett 19:1125–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ranatunga TD, Jervis J et al (2000) The effect of overliming on the toxicity of dilute acid pretreated lignocellulosics: the role of inorganics, uronic acids and ether-soluble organics. Enz Microb Technol 27:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Schirmer-Michel AC, Flores SH et al (2008) Production of ethanol from soybean hull hydrolysate by osmotolerant Candida guilliermondii NRRL Y-2075. Biores Technol 99:2898–2904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schneider H (1996) Selective removal of acetic acid from hardwood-spent sulfite liquor using a mutant yeast. Enz Microb Technol 19:94–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sjolander NO, Langlykke AF et al (1938) Butyl alcohol fermentation of wood sugar. Indust Eng Chem 30:1251–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Skammelsen AS, Thomsen BA (1998) Optimization of wet oxidation pretreatment of wheat straw. Biores Technol 64:139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sreenath H, Jeffries TW (2000) Production of ethanol from wood hydrolyzate by yeasts. Biores Technol 72:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Su TM, Lamed RJ et al. (1980) Final report to the United States Department of Energy, Subcontract No. XR-9-8271-1 by General Electric CoGoogle Scholar
  76. Sun Y, Cheng J (2002) Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Biores Technol 83:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Taherzadeh MJ, Gustafsson L et al (1999) Conversion of furfural in aerobic and anaerobic batch fermentation of glucose by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biosci Bioeng 87:169–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Taherzadeh MJ, Gustafsson L et al (2000) Inhibition effects of furfural on aerobic batch cultivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae growing on ethanol and/or acetic acid. J Biosci Bioeng 90:374–380Google Scholar
  79. Tran AV, Chambers RP (1985) Red oak wood derived inhibitors in the ethanol fermentation of xylose by Pichia stipitis CBS 5776. Biotechnol Lett 7:841–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. van Zyl C, Prior B et al (1991) Acetic acid inhibition of d-xylose fermentation by Pichia stipitis. Enzyme Microb Technol 13:82–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Yourchisin D, Van Walsum G (2004) Comparison of microbial inhibition and enzymatic hydrolysis rates of liquid and solid fractions produced from pretreatment of biomass with carbonic acid and liquid hot water. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 113–116:1073–1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zaldivar J, Ingram LO (1999) Effect of selected aldehydes on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Bioeng 65:24–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zaldivar J, Ingram LO (2000) Effect of alcohol compounds found in hemicellulose hydrolysate on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Bioeng 68:524–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zaldivar J, Ingram LO et al (1999) Effect of organic acids on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli LY01. Biotechnol Bioeng 66:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zhang M, Franden M et al (1995) Promising ethanologens for xylose fermentation. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 51(52):527–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zheng YZ, Lin HM et al (1998) Pretreatment for cellulose hydrolysis by carbon dioxide explosion. Biotechnol Prog 14:890–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Renewable Energy LaboratoryGoldenUSA

Personalised recommendations