Cellulase Production on Bagasse Pretreated with Hot Water

  • Mary Bigelow
  • Charles E. Wyman
Chapter
Part of the Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology book series (ABAB)

Abstract

Because pretreatment of biomass with hot water only in differential flow systems offers very digestible cellulose and potentially less inhibition by liquid hydrolysate, solids and liquid hydrolysate from bagasse pretreated with hot water were fed to a batch cellulase production system using the Rut C30 strain of Trichoderma reesei to determine the suitability of these substrates for cellulase production. The organism was found to be sensitive to inhibitors in the liquid hydrolysate but could be adapted to improve its tolerance. In addition, filtering of the material reduced inhibitory effects. The organism was also sensitive to some component in the solids, and they had to be washed heavily to achieve good growth and cellulase production rates. Even then, a lag was found before enzyme production would commence on pretreated solids whereas no such lag was experienced with Solka Floe. However, once enzyme production began, as high and even somewhat greater cellulase productivities were realized with washed pretreated solids. Adding lignin to Solka Floe delayed enzyme production, suggesting that lignin or other materials in the lignin solids could cause the lag observed for pretreated bagasse, but more studies are needed to resolve the actual reason for this delay.

Index Entries

cellulase production hot water pretreatment Rut C30 Trichoderma reesei 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Wyman, C.E., ed. (1996), Handbook on Bioethanol: Production and Utilization, Applied Energy Technology Series, Taylor & Francis, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lynd, L.R., Elander, R.T., Wyman, C.E. (1996), Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 57/58, 741–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hinman, N.D., Schell, D.J., Riley, C.J., Bergeron, P.W., Walter, P.J. (1992), Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 34/35, 639–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Himmel, M.E., Ruth, M.F., Wyman, C.E. (1999), Curr. Opin.Biotechnol. 10(4), 358–364.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wooley, R., Ruth, M., Glassner, D., Sheehan, J. (1999), Biotechnol. Prog. 15, 794–803.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hendy, N., Wilke, CR., Blanch, H.W. (1984), Enzyme Microbiol. Technol. 6, 73–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kadam, K. (1996), in Handbook on Bioethanol: Production and Utilization, Wyman, C.E., ed., Applied Energy Technology Series, Taylor & Francis, Washington DC, pp. 213–252.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsu, T.A. (1996), in Handbook on Bioethanol, Production and Utilization, Wyman, C.E., ed., Applied Energy Technology Series, Taylor & Francis, Washington, DC, pp. 179–212.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Allen, S.G., Kam, L.C., Zemann, A.J., Antal, M.J. (1996), Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 35, 2709–2715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bobleter, O. (1994), Prog. Polymer Sci. 19, 797–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Walsum, G.P., Allen, S.G., Spencer, M.J., Laser, M.S., Antal, M.J., Lynd, L.R. (1996), Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 57/58, 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Allen, S.G., Schulman, D., Lichwa, J., Antal, M.J., Laser, M., Lynd, L.R. (2001), Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40, 2934–2941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Laser, M., Schulman, D., Allen, S.G., Lichwa, J., Antal, M.J., Lynd, L.R. (2002), Bioresour. Technol. 81, 33–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (1995), Chemical Analysis and Testing Laboratory Analytical Procedures, Golden, CO.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary Bigelow
    • 1
  • Charles E. Wyman
    • 1
  1. 1.BC International and Thayer School of EngineeringDartmouth CollegeHanoverGermany

Personalised recommendations