Enhancing the Enzymatic Saccharification of Agricultural and Processing Residues of Cassava through Pretreatment Techniques

Published Date
June 2015, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 303–315
Original Paper

First Online: 

17 January 2015

Abstract

Purpose

The aerial part of the cassava plant comprising stems, leaves and cassava peels are waste biomasses generated during the cultivation and processing of cassava. The potential of these biomasses as alternative substrates for the production of bioethanol was investigated.

Methods

The efficacy of three types of pretreatments such as (i) hydrothermal treatment, (ii) microwave exposure of acid slurry and (iii) dilute acid treatment (steam as well as under pressure) in enhancing the enzymatic degradability of agricultural residues of cassava was investigated.

Results

Whilst cassava stems and peels had 15.00 and 29.84 % starch along with 22.8 and 14 % cellulose respectively, dry leaves had only 2.43 % starch and 17.3 % cellulose. Hemicellulose ranged from 23 to 29 % in these biomasses. The pretreated biomasses were compared with the native samples for the fermentable sugar yield during enzyme saccharification by the cellulolytic enzyme complex, Accellerase™ 1000. Among the pretreatments, hydrothermal treatment (HT) of moist powders for 30 min was the most effective in giving the highest yield of reducing sugars, followed by microwave assisted dilute acid treatment for 20 min. Extending the exposure time for HT to 45 and 60 min reduced the sugar yield. Leaf was the most recalcitrant among the three biomasses. Ultrastructural studies using Scanning electron microscopy also supported the saccharification data. Very high extent of release of sugars during saccharification was noticed from cassava peels which also had Ca. 29.84 % starch. Optimal level of Accellerase required for saccharification was 500 mg enzyme protein.

Conclusions

It was concluded from the study that hydrothermal treatment of the powdered biomasses for 30 min was the most appropriate technique to enhance the biodegradation by cellulolytic enzymes.

Author

• N. S. Pooja
• G. Padmaja

References

1. 1.
   Sun, Y., Cheng, J.: Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 83, 1–11 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. 2.
   Cara, C., Moya, M., Ballesteros, I., Negro, M.J., Gonzalez, A., Ruiz, E.: Influence of solid loading on enzymatic hydrolysis of steam exploded or liquid hot water pretreated olive tree biomass. Process Biochem. 42, 1003–1009 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. 3.
   Petersen, M.O., Larsen, J., Thomsen, B.H.: Optimization of hydrothermal pretreatment of wheat straw for production of bioethanol at low water consumption, without addition of chemicals. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 834–840 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. 4.
   Hendriks, A.T.W.M., Zeeman, G.: Pretreatments to enhance the digestibility of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 10–18 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. 5.
   Lynd, L., Elander, R., Wyman, C.: Likely features and costs of mature biomass to ethanol technology. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 57–58, 741–761 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. 6.
   Mosier, N., Wyman, C., Dale, B., Elander, R., Lee, Y.Y., Holtzapple, M.T., Ladisch, M.: Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 96, 673–686 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. 7.
   Yang, B., Wyman, C.E.: Pretreatment: The key to unlocking low cost cellulosic ethanol. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefining 2, 26–40 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. 8.
   Zhang, B., Shahbazi, A.: Recent developments in pretreatment technologies for production of lignocellulosic biofuels. Pet. Environ. Biotechnol. 2, 2–8 (2011)Google Scholar
9. 9.
   Brodeur, G., Yau, E., Badol, K., Collier, J., Ramachandran, K.B., Ramakrishnan, S.: Chemical and physiochemical pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass: A review. Enzyme Res. (2011). doi:10.4061/2011/787532Google Scholar
10. 10.
    Fengel, D., Wegener, G.: Wood: Chemistry, Ultrastructure Reactions. W de Gruyter, Berlin (1984)Google Scholar
11. 11.
    Chang, V.S., Holtzapple, M.T.: Fundamental factors affecting biomass enzymatic reactivity. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 84, 5–37 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. 12.
    Wyman, C.E.: Biomass ethanol: Technical progress, opportunities and commercial challenges. Annl. Rev. Energy Environ. 24, 189–226 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. 13.
    FAOSTAT FAO Production Statistics. (2012) faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx. Accessed 15 Jan 2014Google Scholar
14. 14.
    Johnson, P.N., Raymond, W.D.: The chemical composition of some tropical food plants IV. Manioc. Trop. Sci. 7, 109–112 (1965)Google Scholar
15. 15.
    Divya Nair, M.P., Padmaja, G., Moorthy, S.N.: Biodegradation of cassava starch factory residue using a combination of cellulases, xylanases and hemicellulases. Biomass Bioenergy 35, 1211–1218 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. 16.
    Divya Nair, M.P., Padmaja, G., Sajeev, M.S., Sheriff, J.T.: Bioconversion of cellulo-starch waste from cassava starch industries for ethanol production using pretreatment techniques and improved enzyme systems. Ind. Biotechnol. 8, 300–308 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. 17.
    Anon. Spezyme_ Xtra-High performance a-amylase for starch hydrolysis. Spezyme Xtra Product Information published by Genencor International, a Division of Danisco (2011a)Google Scholar
18. 18.
    Anon. Stargen 001-granular starch hydrolyzing enzyme for ethanol production. Stargen product brochure published by Genencor International, a Division of Danisco. Available from: http://www.beutilityfree.com/pdffiles/Stargen-001.pdf (2011b)
19. 19.
    Shanavas, S., Padmaja, G., Moorthy, S.N., Sajeev, M.S., Sheriff, J.T.: Process optimization for bioethanol production from cassava starch using novel eco-friendly enzymes. Biomass Bioenergy 35, 901–909 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. 20.
    Nelson, N.: A photometric adaptation of the Somogyi method for determination of glucose. J. Biol. Chem. 153, 375–380 (1944)Google Scholar
21. 21.
    Moorthy, S.N., Padmaja, G.: A rapid titrimetric method for the determination of starch content in cassava tubers. J. Root Crops 28, 30–37 (2002)Google Scholar
22. 22.
    Sadasivam, S., Manickam, A.: Biochemical Methods. New Age International Publishers, New Delhi (1996)Google Scholar
23. 23.
    Goering, H.D., Vansoest, P.J.: Forage fiber analysis. USDA Agricultural Research Service, Washington (1975)Google Scholar
24. 24.
    AOAC Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 18th Edition William Horwitz and George W Latimer (eds.). (2005)Google Scholar
25. 25.
    Kumar, P., Barrett, D.M., Delwiche, M.J., Stroeve, P.: Methods of pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for efficient hydrolysis and biofuel production. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 48, 3713–3729 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. 26.
    Klingspohn, U., Bader, J., Kruse, B., Kishore, P.V., Schiiger, K., Kracke-Helm, H.A., Likidis, Z.: Utilization of potato pulp from potato starch processing. Process Biochem. 28, 91–98 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. 27.
    Mayer, F.: Potato pulp: Properties, physical modification and applications. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 59, 231–235 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. 28.
    Nomanbhay, S.M., Hussain, R., Palanisamy, K.: Microwave assisted enzymatic saccharification of oil palm empty fruit bunch fiber for enhanced fermentable sugar yield. J. Sustain. Bioenergy Syst. 3, 7–17 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. 29.
    Thompson, D.N., Chen, H.C., Grethlein, H.E.: Comparison of pretreatment methods on the basis of available surface area. Bioresour. Technol. 39, 155–163 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. 30.
    Gregg, D., Saddler, J.N.: A techno-economic assessment of the pretreatment and fractionation steps of a biomass-to-ethanol process. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 57–58, 711–727 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. 31.
    Grethlein, H.E.: The effect of pore size distribution on the rate of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose substrates. Bioresour. Technol. 3, 155–160 (1985)Google Scholar
32. 32.
    Palonen, H., Thomsen, A.B., Tenkanen, M., Schmidit, A.S., Viikari, L.: Evaluation of wet oxidation pretreatment for enzymatic hydrolysis of softwood. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 117, 1–17 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. 33.
    Laser, M., Schulman, D., Allen, S.G., Lichwa, J., Antal, M.J., et al.: A comparison of liquid hot water and steam pretreatments of sugarcane bagasse for bioconversion to ethanol. Bioresour. Technol. 81, 33–44 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. 34.
    Zhang, B., Shahbazi, A., Wang, L., Diallo, O., Whitmore, A.: Hot water pretreatment of cattails extraction of cellulose. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 38, 819–824 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. 35.
    Antal Jr, M.J.: Water: A traditional solvent pregnant with new applications. In: White Jr, H.J. (ed.) Proceedings 12th International Conference on the Properties of Water and Steam, pp. 24–30. Begell House, New York (1996)Google Scholar
36. 36.
    Duff, S.J.B., Murray, W.D.: Bioconversion of forest products industry waste cellulosics to fuel ethanol: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 55, 1–33 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. 37.
    Kandari, V., Gupta, S.: Bioconversion of vegetable and fruit peel wastes in viable product. J. Microbiol. Biotech. Res. 2, 308–312 (2012)Google Scholar
38. 38.
    Grous, W.R., Converse, A.O., Grethlein, H.E.: Effect of steam explosion pretreatment on pore size and enzymatic hydrolysis of poplar. Enzyme Microbiol. Technol. 8, 274–280 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39. 39.
    Ooshima, H., Aso, K., Harono, Y., Yamamoto, T.: Microwave treatment of cellulosic materials for their enzymatic hydrolysis. Biotechnol. Lett. 6, 289–294 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. 40.
    Palav, T., Seetharaman, K.: Impact of microwave heating on the physiochemical properties of a starch water model system. Carbohydr. Polym. 67, 596–604 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41. 41.
    Xiong, J., Ye, J., Liang, W.Z., Fan, P.M.: Influence of microwave on the ultrastructure of cellulose. J. South China Univ. Technol. 28, 84–89 (2000)Google Scholar
42. 42.
    Zhu, S., Wu, Y., Yu, Z., Chen, Q., Wu, G., Yu, F., Wang, C., Jin, S.: Microwave-assisted alkali pretreatment of wheat straw and its enzymatic hydrolysis. Process Biochem. 94, 437–442 (2006)Google Scholar
43. 43.
    Binod, P., Satyanagalakshimi, K., Sindhu, R., Janu, U., Sukumaran, R.K., Pandey, A.: Short duration microwave assisted pretreatment enhances the enzymatic saccharification and fermentable sugar yield from sugarcane bagasse. Renew. Ener. 37, 109–116 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44. 44.
    Digman, M.F., Shinners, K.J., Casler, M.D., et al.: Optimizing on-farm pretreatment of perennial grasses for fuel ethanol production. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 5305–5314 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. 45.
    Du, B., Sharma, L.N., Becker, C., et al.: Effect of varying feedstock-pretreatment chemistry combination on the formation and accumulation of potentially inhibitory degradation products in biomass hydrolysates. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 107, 430–440 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46. 46.
    Kumar, R., Wyman, C.E.: Access of cellulase to cellulose and lignin for poplar solids produced by leading pretreatment technologies. Biotechnol. Prog. 2, 807–819 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47. 47.
    McMillan, J.D.: Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. In: Himmel, M.E., Baker, J.O., Overend, R.P. (eds.) Enzymatic Conversion of Biomass for Fuels Production, pp. 292–324. American Chemical Society, Washington DC (1994)Google Scholar
48. 48.
    Chantawongsa, N., Kongkiattikajorn, J.: Pretreatment methods for banana peel as a substrate for the bioproduction of ethanol in SHF and SSF. Internat. J. Comput. Internet Manage. 21, 15–19 (2013)Google Scholar

For further details log on website :
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12649-015-9345-8