Yield and quality of bacterial cellulose from agricultural waste

Skiba, Ekaterina A.; Gladysheva, Evgenia K.; Budaeva, Vera V.; Aleshina, Lyudmila A.; Sakovich, Gennady V.

doi:10.1007/s10570-021-04372-x

Original Research
Published: 22 January 2022

Yield and quality of bacterial cellulose from agricultural waste

Ekaterina A. Skiba¹,
Evgenia K. Gladysheva¹,
Vera V. Budaeva ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1628-0815¹,
Lyudmila A. Aleshina² &
Gennady V. Sakovich¹

Cellulose volume 29, pages 1543–1555 (2022)Cite this article

301 Accesses
17 Altmetric
Metrics details

Abstract

The global abundance and availability of oat hulls make them a promising feedstock to produce a unique type of cellulose, the bacterial one. This is the first study examining how a chemical pretreatment method of oat hulls influences the yield and properties of bacterial cellulose (BC) in extended cultivation. Here we employed our own pretreatment methods that use dilute HNO₃ and NaOH solutions in one and two stages, a total of four pretreatment methods. Further technological stages were performed in the same manner: pulps were enzymatically hydrolyzed with commercial enzymes CelloLux-A and BrewZyme BGX, and biosynthesis of BC was run using the Medusomyces gisevii Sa-12 symbiotic culture. A two-stage (HNO₃ + NaOH) pretreatment of oat hulls was found to afford a biologically good medium and increase the BC yield 1.8−3.2-fold compared to the other pretreatments used. A pretreatment method of oat hulls determined the BC yield and degree of polymerization. However, a pretreatment method had no impact on the highest crystallinity index and allomorph Iα content of all the BC samples, which is explained by Medusomyces gisevii Sa-12 used. The crystallinity index and allomorph Iα content, as measured by X-ray diffractometry, are proposed for use as BC quality assessment criteria.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

Bikales NM, Segal L (1971) Cellulose and cellulose derivatives, vols Iv–V. Wiley Intersciense, New York, USA, p 510
Cacicedo ML, Castro MC, Servetas I, Bosnea L, Boura K, Tsafrakidou P, Castro GR (2016) Progress in bacterial cellulose matrices for biotechnological applications. Bioresource Technol 213:172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.02.071
CAS Article Google Scholar
Campano C, Balea A, Blanco A, Negro C (2016) Enhancement of the fermentation process and properties of bacterial cellulose: a review. Cellulose 23(1):57–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-015-0802-0
CAS Article Google Scholar
Chakravorty S, Bhattacharya S, Chatzinotas A, Chakraborty W, Bhattacharya D, Gachhui R (2016) Kombucha tea fermentation: microbial and biochemical dynamics. Int J Food Microbiol 220:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.12.015
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Cheng Z, Yang RD, Liu X (2016) Production of bacterial cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum through utilizing acetic acid hydrolysate of bagasse as low-carbon source. Bioresources 12(1):1190–1200. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.12.1.1190-1200
French AD (2014) Idealized powder diffraction patterns for cellulose polymorphs. Cellulose 21:885–896. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-4
CAS Article Google Scholar
French AD (2020) Increment in evolution of cellulose crystallinity analysis. Cellulose 27(10):5445–5448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03172-z
Article Google Scholar
Gama M, Dourado F, Bielecki S (2016) Bacterial nanocellulose from biotechnology to bio-economy. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, p 260
Book Google Scholar
Goelzer FDE, Faria-Tischer PCS, Vitorino JC, Sierakowski MR, Tischer CA (2009) Production and characterization of nanospheres of bacterial cellulose from Acetobacter xylinum from processed rice bark. Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 29(2):546–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2008.10.013
CAS Article Google Scholar
Goh WN, Rosma A, Kaur B, Fazilah A, Karim AA, Rajeev B (2012) Fermentation of black tea broth (Kombucha): I. Effects of sucrose concentration and fermentation time on the yield of microbial cellulose. Int Food Res J 19(1):109–117
Guo X, Cavka A, Jönsson L, Hong F (2013) Comparison of methods for detoxification of spruce hydrolysate for bacterial cellulose production. Microb Cell Fact 12:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2859-12-93
CAS Article Google Scholar
Hestrin S, Schramm M (1954) Synthesis of cellulose by Acetobacter xylinum: II. Preparation of freeze-dried cells capable of polymerizing glucose to cellulose. Biochem J 58:345–352
CAS Article Google Scholar
Hong F, Zhu XY, Yang G, Yang XX (2011) Wheat straw acid hydrolysate as a potential cost-effective feedstock for production of bacterial cellulose. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 86(5):675–680. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2567
CAS Article Google Scholar
Hu F, Ragauskas A (2012) Pretreatmentand lignocellulosic chemistry. Bioenergy Res 5(4):1043–1066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-012-9208-0
CAS Article Google Scholar
Hussain Z, Sajjad W, Khan T, Wahid F (2019) Production of bacterial cellulose from industrial wastes: a revie. Cellulose 26(5):2895–2911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02307-1
CAS Article Google Scholar
Kashcheyeva EI, Gismatulina YA, Budaeva VV (2019) Pretreatments of non-woody cellulosic feedstocks for bacterial cellulose synthesis. Polymers 11(10):1645. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11101645
CAS Article PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kashcheyeva EI, Skiba EA, Zolotukhin VN, Budaeva VV (2020) Recycling of nitric acid solution in chemical pretreatment of oat hulls for biorefining, BioResources 15(1):1575–1586. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.15.1.1575-1586
Keshk SMAS (2014) Bacterial cellulose production and its industrial applications. J Bioprocess Biotech 4:150–160. https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9821.1000150
CAS Article Google Scholar
Kim TH (2013) Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. In: Yang ST, El-Enshasy HA, Thongchul N, Martin Y (eds) Bioprocessing technologies in integrated biorefinery for production of biofuels, biochemicals, and biopolymers from biomass. Wiley, New York, pp 91–109
Google Scholar
Kiziltas EE, Kiziltas A, Gardner DJ (2015) Synthesis of bacterial cellulose using hot water extracted wood sugars. Carbohydr Polym 124:131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.01.036
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Klemm D, Cranston ED, Fischer D, Gama M, Kedzior SA, Kralisch D, Rauchfuss F (2018) Nanocellulose as a natural source for groundbreaking applications in materials science: today’s state. Mater Today 21(7):720–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2018.02.001
CAS Article Google Scholar
Li W, Zhang S, Zhang T, Shen Y, Han L, Peng Z, Xie Z, Zhong C, Jia S (2021) Bacterial cellulose production from ethylenediamine pretreated Caragana korshinskii Kom. Ind Crop Prod 164:113340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2021.113340
CAS Article Google Scholar
Mankar AR, Pandey A, Modak A, Pant KK (2021) Pre-treatment of lignocellulosic biomass: a review on recent advances. Bioresource Technol 334:125235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125235
CAS Article Google Scholar
Marsh AJ, O’Sullivan O, Hill C, Ross RP, Cotter PD (2014) Sequence-based analysis of the bacterial and fungal Compositions of multiple kombucha (tea fungus) samples. Food Microbiol 38:171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2013.09.003
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Orlovska I, Podolich O, Kukharenko O, Zaets I, Reva O, Khirunenko L, Zmejkoski D, Rogalsky S, Barh D, Tiwari S, Kumavath R, Góes-Neto A, Azevedo V, Brenig B, Ghosh P, Vera JP, Kozyrovska N (2021) Bacterial cellulose retains robustness but its synthesis declines after exposure to a Mars-like environment simulated outside the international space station. Astrobiology 21(6):706–717. https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2020.2332
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Pacheco G, Nogueira CR, Meneguin AB, Trovatti E, Silva MCC, Machado RTA, Ribeiro SJL, Filho ECS, Baruda HS (2017) Development and characterization of bacterial cellulose produced by cashew tree residues as alternative carbon source. Ind Crop Prod 107:13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.05.026
CAS Article Google Scholar
Pillai MM, Tran HN, Sathishkumar G, Manimekalai K, Yoon JH, Lim DY, Noh I, Bhattacharyya A (2021) Symbiotic culture of nanocellulose pellicle: a potential matrix for 3D Bioprinting. Mat Sci Eng C-Bio S 119:111552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2020.111552
CAS Article Google Scholar
Provin AP, dos Reis VO, Hilesheim SE, Bianchet RT, de Aguiar Dutra AR, Cubas ALV (2021) Use of bacterial cellulose in the textile industry and the wettability challenge—a review. Cellulose 28:8255–8274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04059-3
CAS Article Google Scholar
Shi QS, Feng J, Li WR, Zhou G, Chen AM, Ouyang YS, Chen YB (2013) Effect of different conditions on the average degree of polymerization of bacterial cellulose produced by Gluconacetobacter Intermedius BC-41. Cell Chem Technol 47(7–8):503–508
CAS Google Scholar
Skiba EA, Budaeva VV, Baibakova OV, Zolotukhin VN, Sakovich GV (2017) Dilute nitric-acid pretreatment of oat hulls for ethanol production. Biochem Eng J 126:118–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2016.09.003
CAS Article Google Scholar
Skiba EA, Budaeva VV, Ovchinnikova EV, Gladysheva EK, Kashcheyeva EI, Pavlov IN, Sakovich GV (2020) A technology for pilot production of bacterial cellulose from oat hulls. Chem Eng J 383:123128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.123128
CAS Article Google Scholar
Skiba EA, Gladysheva EK, Golubev DS, Budaeva VV, Aleshina LA, Sakovich GV (2021) Self-standardization of quality of bacterial cellulose produced by Medusomyces gisevii in nutrient media derived from Miscanthus biomass. Carbohydr Polym 252:117178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.117178
CAS Article Google Scholar
Thaveemas P, Chuenchom L, Kaowphong S, Techasakul S, Saparpakorn P, Dechtrirat D (2021) Magnetic carbon nanofiber composite adsorbent through green in-situ conversion of bacterial cellulose for highly efficient removal of bisphenol A. Bioresource Technol 333:125184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125184
CAS Article Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Office of Global Analysis. World Agricultural Production (Circular Series WAP 11–19). https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pdf. Accessed November 2019
Urbina L, Corcuera MÁ, Gabilondo N, Eceiza A, Retegi A (2021) A review of bacterial cellulose: sustainable production from agricultural waste and applications in various fields. Cellulose 28:8229–8253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04020-4
CAS Article Google Scholar
Vazquez A, Foresti ML, Cerrutti P, Galvagno M (2013) Bacterial cellulose from simple and low cost production media by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. J Polym Environ 21:545–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-012-0541-3
CAS Article Google Scholar
Velásquez-Riaño M, Bojacá V (2017) Production of bacterial cellulose from alternative low-cost substrates. Cellulose 24(7):2677–2698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1309-7
CAS Article Google Scholar
Villaverde JJ, Domingues RMA, Freire CSR, Silvestre AJD, Pascoal Neto C, Ligero P, Vega A (2009) Miscanthus×giganteus extractives: a source of valuable phenolic compounds and sterols. J Agric Food Chem 57:3626–3631. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf900071t
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Volova TG, Shumilova AA, Shidlovskiy IP, Nikolaeva ED, Sukovatiy AG, Vasiliev AD, Shishatskay EI (2018) Antibacterial properties of films of cellulose composites with silver nanoparticles and antibiotics. Polym Test 65:54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.10.023
CAS Article Google Scholar
Yang XY, Huang C, Guo HJ, Xiong L, Li YY, Zhang HR, Chen XD (2013) Bioconversion of elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum) acid hydrolysate to bacterial cellulose by Gluconacetobacter xylinus. J Appl Microbiol 115(4):995–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.12255
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Yurkevich DI, Kutyshenko VP (2002) Medusomyces (Tea Fungus): a scientific history, composition, features of physiology and metabolism. Biophysics 47:1116–1129
CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding was provided by Russian Science Foundation (Grant No. 17-19-01054).

Funding

The research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Grant #17–19-01054).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Institute for Problems of Chemical and Energetic Technologies, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IPCET SB RAS), Biysk, Altai Krai, Russia, 659322
Ekaterina A. Skiba, Evgenia K. Gladysheva, Vera V. Budaeva & Gennady V. Sakovich
Petrozavodsk State University, Petrozavodsk, Russia, 185910
Lyudmila A. Aleshina

Authors

Ekaterina A. Skiba
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Evgenia K. Gladysheva
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Vera V. Budaeva
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Lyudmila A. Aleshina
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Gennady V. Sakovich
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

EAS Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing, Visualization, Validation. EKG Investigation, Writing—original draft, Visualization, Formal analysis. VVB Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—review & editing, Validation. LAA Formal analysis, Writing—review & editing. GVS Supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vera V. Budaeva.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 35 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Skiba, E.A., Gladysheva, E.K., Budaeva, V.V. et al. Yield and quality of bacterial cellulose from agricultural waste. Cellulose 29, 1543–1555 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04372-x

Download citation

Received: 06 August 2021
Accepted: 10 December 2021
Published: 22 January 2022
Issue Date: February 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04372-x

Keywords

Oat hulls
Lignocellulose pretreatment
Bacterial cellulose
Medusomyces gisevii