, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 1351–1359 | Cite as

Understanding the effects of lignosulfonate on enzymatic saccharification of pure cellulose

  • Hongming Lou
  • Haifeng Zhou
  • Xiuli Li
  • Mengxia Wang
  • J. Y. Zhu
  • Xueqing Qiu
Original Paper


The effects of lignosulfonate (LS) on enzymatic saccharification of pure cellulose were studied. Four fractions of LS with different molecular weight (MW) prepared by ultrafiltration of a commercial LS were applied at different loadings to enzymatic hydrolysis of Whatman paper under different pH. Using LS fractions with low MW and high degree of sulfonation can enhance enzymatic cellulose saccharification despite LS can bind to cellulase nonproductively. The enhancing effect varies with LS properties, its loading, and hydrolysis pH. Inhibitive effect on cellulose saccharification was also observed using LS with large MW and low degree of sulfonation. The concept of “LS-cellulase aggregate stabilized and enhanced cellulase binding” was proposed to explain the observed enhancement of cellulose saccharification. The concept was demonstrated by the linear correlation between the measured amount of bound cellulase and saccharification efficiency with and without LS of different MW in a range of pH.


Enzymatic hydrolysis Cellulose saccharification Lignosulfonate Surfactant Cellulase binding Hydrophobic interaction Nonproductive binding 



This work was supported by a USDA Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) phase II project (Phase II project (Contract No. 2010-33610-21589) through Biopulping International, a Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grant (2011-68005-30416) from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) through the Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance (NARA), China Excellent Young Scientist Fund (20925622), International Science and Technology Cooperation Program of China (2013DFA41670), and National Natural Science Foundation of China (21376100), The Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC). These programs made the visiting appointments of Hongming Lou and Haifeng Zhou at the US Forest Service (USFS), Forest Products Laboratory (FPL) possible. We acknowledge Fred Matt and Kolby Hirth (both USFS-FPL) for carrying out carbohydrate and sulfur content analyses. JYZ is a co-inventor of a sulfite pretreatment process—SPORL (US patent application published) that produces lignosulfonate.


  1. Bozell JJ, Petersen GR (2010) Technology development for the production of biobased products from biorefinery carbohydrates—the US Department of Energy’s “top 10” revisited. Green Chem 12(4):539–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradford M (1976) A rapid and sensitive for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72(1–2):248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Castanon M, Wilke CR (1981) Effects of the surfactant Tween 80 on Enzymatic hydrolysis of Newspaper. Biotechnol Bioeng 13:1365–1372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eriksson T, Borjesson J, Tjerneld F (2002) Mechanism of surfactant effect in enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose. Enzym Microbial Technol 31(3):353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goldemberg J (2007) Ethanol for a sustainable energy future. Science 315:808–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Haynes CA, Sliwinsky E, Norde W (1994) Structural and electrostatic properties of globular proteins at a polystyrene-water interface. J Colloid Interface Sci 164(2):394–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Helle SS, Duff SJB, Cooper DG (1993) Effect of surfactants on cellulose hydrolysis. Biotechnol Bioeng 42:611–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Henrissat B (1994) Cellulases and their interaction with cellulose. Cellulose 1(3):169–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Himmel ME, Ding SY, Johnson DK, Adney WS, Nimlos MR, Brady JW, Foust TD (2007) Biomass recalcitrance: engineering plants and enzymes for biofuels production. Science 315(5813):804–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Igarashi K, Uchihashi T, Koivula A, Wada M, Kimura S, Okamoto T, Penttilä M, Ando T, Samejima M (2011) Traffic jams reduce hydrolytic efficiency of cellulase on cellulose surface. Science 333(6047):1279–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim MH, Lee SB, Ryu DDY, Reese ET (1982) Surface deactivation of cellulase and its prevention. Enzym Microbial Technol 4(2):99–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lan TQ, Lou H, Zhu JY (2013) Enzymatic saccharification of lignocelluloses should be conducted at elevated pH 5.2–6.2. Bioenerg Res 6(2):476–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lehtio J, Sugiyama J, Gustavsson M, Fransson L, Linder M, Teeri TT (2003) The binding specificity and affinity determinants of family 1 and family 3 cellulose binding modules. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(2):484–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Leu SY, Zhu JY (2013) Substrate-related factors affecting enzymatic saccharification of lignocelluloses: our recent understanding. Bioenerg Res 6(2):405–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leu S-Y, Gleisner R, Zhu JY, Sessions J, Marrs G (2013) Robust enzymatic saccharification of a Douglas-fir forest harvest residue by SPORL. Biomass Bioenergy 59:393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li J, Li S, Fan C, Yan Z (2012) The mechanism of poly(ethylene glycol) 4000 effect on enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose. Colloids Surf B 89(1):203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu H, Zhu JY (2010) Eliminating inhibition of enzymatic hydrolysis by lignosulfonate in unwashed sulfite-pretreated aspen using metal salts. Bioresour Technol 101(23):9120–9127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu H, Zhu JY, Fu S (2010) Effects of lignin-metal complexation on enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. J Agric Food Chem 58:7233–7238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu H, Zhu JY, Chai XS (2011) In situ, rapid, and temporally resolved measurements of cellulase adsorption onto lignocellulosic substrates by UV-vis spectrophotometry. Langmuir 27(1):272–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lou H, Zhu JY, Lan TQ, Lai H, Qiu X (2013) pH-induced lignin surface modification to reduce nonspecific cellulase binding and enhance enzymatic saccharification of lignocelluloses. ChemSusChem 6(5):919–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nakagame S, Chandra RP, Kadla JF, Saddler JN (2011a) Enhancing the enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass by increasing the carboxylic acid content of the associated lignin. Biotechnol Bioeng 108(3):538–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nakagame S, Chandra RP, Kadla JF, Saddler JN (2011b) The isolation, characterization and effect of lignin isolated from steam pretreated Douglas-fir on the enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. Bioresour Technol 102(6):4507–4517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ooshima H, Sakata M, Harano Y (1986) Enhancement of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose by surfactant. Biotechnol Bioeng 28:1727–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ouyang X, Deng Y, Qian Y, Zhang P, Qiu X (2011) Adsorption characteristics of lignosulfonates in salt-free and salt-added aqueous solutions. Biomacromolecules 12(9):3313–3320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rollin JA, Zhu Z, Sathitsuksanoh N, Zhang Y-HP (2011) Increasing cellulose accessibility is more important than removing lignin: a comparison of cellulose solvent-based lignocellulose fractionation and soaking in aqueous ammonia. Biotechnol Bioeng 108(1):22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shiiba H, Hayashi S, Yui T (2013) Molecular dynamics study of carbohydrate binding module mutants of fungal cellobiohydrolases. Carbohydr Res 374:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Várnai A, Siika-Aho M, Viikari L (2013) Carbohydrate-binding modules (CBMs) revisited: reduced amount of water counterbalances the need for CBMs. Biotechnol Biofuels 6(1)Google Scholar
  28. Wang QQ, He Z, Zhu Z, Zhang Y-HP, Ni Y, Luo XL, Zhu JY (2012) Evaluations of cellulose accessibilities of lignocelluloses by solute exclusion and protein adsorption techniques. Biotechnol Bioeng 109(2):381–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wang Z, Zhu JY, Fu Y, Qin M, Shao Z, Jiang J, Yang F (2013a) Lignosulfonate-mediated cellulase adsorption: enhanced enzymatic saccharification of lignocellulose through weakening nonproductive binding to lignin. Biotechnol Biofuels 6:156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang ZJ, Lan TQ, Zhu JY (2013b) Lignosulfonate and elevated pH can enhance enzymatic saccharification of lignocelluloses. Biotechnol Biofuels 6:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhou H, Lou H, Yang D, Zhu JY, Qiu X (2013a) Lignosulfonate to enhance enzymatic saccharification of lignocelluloses: Role of molecular weight and substrate lignin. Ind Eng Chem Res 52(25):8464–8470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhou H, Zhu JY, Luo X, Leu S-Y, Wu X, Gleisner R, Dien BS, Hector RE, Yang D, Qiu X, Horn E, Negron J (2013b) Bioconversion of beetle-killed lodgepole pine using SPORL: Process scale-up design, lignin coproduct, and high solids fermentation without detoxification. Ind Eng Chem Res 52(45):16057–16065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhu JY, Zhuang XS (2012) Conceptual net energy output for biofuel production from lignocellulosic biomass through biorefining. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38(4):583–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhu JY, Pan XJ, Wang GS, Gleisner R (2009) Sulfite pretreatment (SPORL) for robust enzymatic saccharification of spruce and red pine. Bioresour Technol 100(8):2411–2418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhu JY, Gleisner R, Scott CT, Luo XL, Tian S (2011) High titer ethanol production from simultaneous enzymatic saccharification and fermentation of aspen at high solids: a comparison between SPORL and dilute acid pretreatments. Bioresour Technol 102(19):8921–8929CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hongming Lou
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Haifeng Zhou
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xiuli Li
    • 1
  • Mengxia Wang
    • 1
  • J. Y. Zhu
    • 2
  • Xueqing Qiu
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Chemistry and Chemical EngineeringSouth China University of TechnologyGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Forest Products LaboratoryUSDA Forest ServiceMadisonUSA
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Pulp and Paper EngineeringSouth China University of TechnologyGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations