Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Microbial-based separate and simultaneous saccharification and ethanol fermentation of poplar (Populus euramericana) substrate

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study reports a simple all microbial-based consolidated bioprocess for the conversion of poplar parings into ethanol. The bacterium Bacillus cereus G9241 CP 026,376 and the yeast Candida tropicalis MF 289,181 were employed for this purpose. Potential of the cellulolytic B. cereus for saccharification of the substrate and bioethanol fermentation was unveiled by employing the separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF) as well as simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) processes. The bacterium as well as yeast grew well in the 2% substrate hydrolyzate and the cell counts reached up to 19,701 × 107 and 852 × 106/ml at 96 h, respectively. For the bacterially fermented saccharified substrate, the HMF content reduced from 489 ± 38.1 µg/L at 24 h to 232 µg/L (52.56%) at 96 h. In case of the yeast fermented poplar hydrolyzate, the HMF content dropped down to 351.3 ± 48.6 µg/L right at first sampling point and thereafter became un-detectable. In case of SSF, HMF could appear only at 72 and 96 h of fermentation with respective values of 260.3 ± 25.8 and 243 ± 8.66 µg/L. Acetic acid content among the differently fermented substrates ranged from 460 ± 230 to 5360 ± 503 mg/L. The bacterial cellulases yielded up to 6.742 and 8.561 mg/ml of glucose and xylose of 2% substrate, respectively. In case of yeast monoculture, the glucose and xylose contents reduced down to 34.17% and 85.28%, respectively, at 24 h post-inoculation with concomitant ethanol production of 634 ± 159 mg/L. Following 24 h of co-culturing of the microbes in the substrate hydrolyzate, the glucose and xylose reduced down to 39.69% and 82%, respectively, with accompanying ethanol level of 501.38 ± 46.7 mg/L. Glucose content of 24 h incubated SSF fluids was 1568 ± 226 mg/L, whereas the xylose remained non-detectable throughout the study period. Ethanol productions at 24, 48, 72 and 96 h of incubations for the SSF experiment were 140.43 ± 44.8, 60.18 ± 13.5, 177.78 ± 23.9 and 83.48 ± 10.3 mg/L, respectively. The simple experiments reported here provide a workable model to assess the potential of suitable microbes for bioethanol production from plants’ biowastes by a consolidated bioprocess without any drastic pretreatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Antczak, A., Szadkowski, J., Szadkowska, D., & Zawadzki, J. (2021). Assessment of the effectiveness of liquid hot water and steam explosion pretreatments of fast-growing poplar (Populus trichocarpa) wood. Wood Science and Technology, 1–23.

  • Arantes, V., & Saddler, J. N. (2011). Cellulose accessibility limits the effectiveness of minimum cellulase loading on the efficient hydrolysis of pretreated lignocellulosic substrates. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 4, 3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, A. M., Loshe, M., & Usadel, B. (2014). Trimmomatic: A flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics, 30(15), 2114–2120.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brethauer, S., Antczak, A., Balan, R., Zielenkiewicz, T., & Studer, M. H. (2020). Steam explosion pretreatment of beechwood. Part 2: Quantification of Cellulase inhibitors and their effect on avicel hydrolysis. Energies, 13(14), 3638.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie, D. (1940). Wood as a chemical raw product: Latest developments in sugar and alcohol production. Chemistry and Industry, 59, 671–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, T., & Yao, S. (2011). Thermophilic, lignocellulolytic bacteria for ethanol production: Current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 92, 13–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Claassen, P. A. M., van Lier, J. B., Lopez Contreras, A. M., van Niel, E. W. J., Sijtsma, L., Stams, A. J. M., de Vries, S. S., & Weusthuis, R. A. (1999). Utilisation of biomass for the supply of energy carriers. Applied Microbiology and BiotechnolOgy, 52, 741–755.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J. T., Shan, C. W., Budsberg, E., Morgan, H., Bura, R., & Gustafson, R. (2016). Hydrocarbon bio-jet fuel from bioconversion of poplar biomass: Techno-economic assessment. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 9(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahnum, D., Tasum, S. O., Triwahyuni, E., Nurdin, M., & Abimanyu, H. (2015). Comparison of SHF and SSF processes using enzyme and dry yeast for optimization of bioethanol production from empty fruit bunch. Energy Procedia, 68, 107–116.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Esteghlalian, A., Hashimoto, A. G., Fenske, J. J., & Penner, M. H. (1997). Modeling and optimization of the dilute sulphuric acid pretreatment of corn stover, poplar and switchgrass. Bioresource Technology, 59, 129–136.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gille, S., & Pauly, M. (2012). O-acetylation of plant cell wall polysaccharides. Frontiers of Plant Science, 3, 12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, E. E., Beglinger, E., Hajny, G. J., & Sherrard, E. C. (1945). Hydrolysis of wood-treatment with sulfuric acid in a stationary digester. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 37(1), 12–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasunuma, T., & Kondo, A. (2012). Consolidated bioprocessing and simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of lignocelluloses to ethanol with thermotolerant yeast strains. Process Biochemistry, 47, 1287–1294.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hgren, K. O., Bura, R., Lesnicki, G., Saddler, J., & Zacch, G. (2007). A comparison between simultaneous saccharification and fermentation and separate hydrolysis and fermentation using steam pretreated corn stover. Process Biochemistry, 42, 834–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, A., Iqbal, M. A., Javid, A., Razaq, A., Aslam, S., Hasan, A., Akmal, M., & Qazi, J. I. (2019). Application of fruit wastes as cost-effective carbon sources for biological sulphate reduction. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology Transactions, a: Science, 43(1), 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, A., & Qazi, J. I. (2012). Biological sulphate reduction using watermelon rind as a carbon source. Biologia (pakistan), 58(1–2), 85–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, A., Shakir, H. A., & Qazi, J. I. (2014). Anaerobic biodegradation of sulphate employing animal manure as a cost effective growth substrate. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 24(3), 913–918.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabeen, F., Hussain, A., Younis, T., Manzoor, M., & Samiullah, K. (2019). Isolation of thermophilic Anoxybacillus beppuensis JF84 and production of thermostable amylase utilizing agro–dairy wastes. Environmental Progress and Sustainable Energy, 38(2), 417–423.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. L., & Semrau, K. T. (1984). Wood hydrolysis for ethanol production—previous experience and the economics of selected processes. Biomass, 5(2), 109–135.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jouzani, G. S., & Taherzadeh, M. J. (2015). Advances in consolidated bioprocessing systems for bioethanol and butanol production from biomass: A comprehensive review. Biofuel Research Journal, 5, 152–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katahira, S., Mizuike, A., Fukuda, H., & Kondo, A. (2006). Ethanol fermentation from lignocellulosic hydrolysate by a recombinant xylose- and cellooligosaccharide-assimilating yeast strain. Applied Microbiology and BiotechnolOgy, 72, 1136–1143.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klinke, H. B., Thomsen, A. B., & Ahring, B. K. (2004). Inhibition of ethanol producing yeast and bacteria by degradation products produced during pretreatment of biomass. Applied Microbiology and BiotechnolOgy, 66, 10–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krumbein, W. C. (1938). Size frequency distribution of sediments and the normal phi curve. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 8, 84–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J. S. (1996). Biomass burning and global change: Remote sensing and inventory development and biomass burning in Africa (pp. 35). The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

  • Lin, Y., & Tanaka, S. (2006). Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: Current state and prospects. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 69, 627–642.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L., Sun, J., Li, M., Wang, S., Pei, H., & Zhang, J. (2009). Enhanced enzymatic hydrolysis and structural features of corn stover by FeCl3 pretreatment. Bioresource Technology, 100, 5853–5858.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Z. I., Ma, M., & Song, M. (2009). Evolutionary engineered ethanologenic yeast detoxifies lignocellulosic biomass conversion inhibitors by reprogrammed pathways. Molecular Genetics and Genomics, 282, 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mabee, W. E., Gregg, D. J., Arato, C., Berlin, A., Bura, R., Gilkes, N., Mirochnik, O., Pan, X., Pye, E. K., & Saddler, J. N. (2006). Updates on softwood-to-ethanol process development. In Twenty-Seventh Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals (pp. 55–70). Humana Press.

  • Menon, V., & Rao, M. (2012). Trends in bioconversion of lignocellulose: Biofuels, platform chemicals & biorefinery concept. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 38(4), 522–550.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olofsson, K., Bertilsson, M., & Liden, G. (2008). A short review of SSF an increasing process option for ethanol production from lignocellulosic feedstocks. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 1, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmqvist, E., Grage, H., Meinander, N. Q., & Hahn-Hägerdal, B. (1999). Main and interaction effects of acetic acid, furfural, and phydroxybenzoic acid on growth and ethanol productivity of yeasts. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 63, 46–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phwan, C. K., Ong, H. C., Chen, W. H., Ling, T. C., Ng, E. P., & Show, P. L. (2018). Overview: Comparison of pretreatment technologies and fermentation processes of bioethanol from microalgae. Energy Conversion and Management, 173, 81–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saleem, A., Hussain, A., Chaudhary, A., Ahmad, Q. A., Iqtedar, M., Javid, A., & Akram, A. M. (2020). Acid-hydrolysis optimization of pomegranate peels waste using response surface methodology for ethanol production. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01117-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saleh, F., Hussain, A., Younis, T., Ali, S., Rashid, M., Ali, A., Mustafa, G., Jabeen, F., & AL-Surhaneee, A. A., Alnoman, M. M., & Qamer, S. (2020). Comparative growth potential of thermophilic amylolytic Bacillus Sp. on unconventional media food wastes and its industrial application. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 27(12), 3499–3504.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, N., Ghosh, S. K., Bannerjee, S., & Aikat, K. (2012). Bioethanol production from agricultural wastes: An overview. Renewable Energy, 37, 19–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tabssum, F., Irfan, M., Shakir, H. A., & Qazi, J. I. (2018). RSM based optimization of nutritional conditions for cellulase mediated Saccharification by Bacillus cereus. Journal of Biological Engineering, 12(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian, S., Zhu, W., Gleisner, R., Pan, X. J., & Zhu, J. Y. (2011). Comparisons of SPORL and dilute acid pretreatments for sugar and ethanol productions from aspen. Biotechnology Progress, 27, 419–427.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tran, D. T., Yet-Pole, I., & Lin, C. W. (2013). Developing co-culture system of dominant cellulolytic Bacillus sp. THLA0409 and dominant ethanolic Klebsiella oxytoca THLC0409 for enhancing ethanol production from lignocellulosic materials. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 44, 762–769.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Auwera, G. A., Carneiro, M. O., Hartl, C., Poplin, R., Del Angel, G., Levy-Moonshine, A., Jordan, T., Shakir, K., Roazen, D., Thibault, J., & Banks, E. (2013). From FastQ data to high-confidence variant calls: The genome analysis toolkit best practices pipeline. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics, 43(1), 11–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyman, C. E. (1996). Handbook on bioethanol: Production and Utilization. Washington, DC, Taylor & Francis.

  • Yee, K. L., Jansen, L. E., Lajoie, C. A., Penner, M. H., Morse, L., & Kelly, C. J. (2018). Furfural and 5-hydroxymethyl-furfural degradation using recombinant manganese peroxidase. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 108, 59–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Gu, F., Zhu, J. Y., & Zalesny, R. S., Jr. (2015). Using a combined hydrolysis factor to optimize high titer ethanol production from sulfite-pretreated poplar without detoxification. Bioresource Technology, 186, 223–231.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, University of Education, Lahore, Pakistan

    Fouzia Tabssum

  2. Institute of Zoology, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

    Muhammad Naeem Khan

Authors
  1. Fouzia Tabssum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammad Naeem Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fouzia Tabssum.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tabssum, F., Khan, M.N. Microbial-based separate and simultaneous saccharification and ethanol fermentation of poplar (Populus euramericana) substrate. Environ Dev Sustain (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02143-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02143-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation