, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 3111–3125 | Cite as

Comprehensive understanding of the non-productive adsorption of cellulolytic enzymes onto lignins isolated from furfural residues

  • Hailong YuEmail author
  • Jingjing Hou
  • Shitao Yu
  • Shiwei Liu
  • Lu Li
  • Qiong Wu
  • Yue Liu
  • Jianxin JiangEmail author
  • Shuangxi Nie
Original Research


Effective enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials to produce fermentable sugars requires close cooperation between cellulase components. However, lignin remaining in the pre-treated substrate plays an inhibitory role in the synergistic action of enzymes through irreversible adsorption. In this study, the effect of cellulolytic enzyme lignin (CEL) isolated from pre-treated furfural residues and dissolved lignins (DLs) precipitated from black liquor on cellulase and cellobiase adsorption behavior was investigated. Green liquor (GL) combined with H2O2 (GL-H2O2) or ethanol (GL-ethanol) pre-treatments markedly decreased the adsorption capacity of CELs. However, the DLs had the strongest binding ability, which was approximately two to three times higher than that of CELs. According to SDS–PAGE analyses, only CBHII and EGII in cellulase and enzymes of 245 kDa and 55 kDa molecular weight in cellobiase were easily bound onto CELs and DLs. Solid-state 13C NMR spectra and FT-IR analysis indicated that pre-treatments reduced the hydrophobic structure of aromatic rings, β-O-4, and carbonyl, and increased the number of hydrophilic carboxyl groups in CELs. For this reason, the hydrophobicity of CELs was decreased, thus reducing their adsorption capacity. Compared with GL-H2O2 pre-treatment, GL-ethanol pre-treatment had a stronger effect on decreasing enzyme adsorption of lignin due to its high hydrophilicity. Heavy damage to aromatic structures, low molecular weight, and the large number of aliphatic portions in DLs caused their strong affinity for enzymes, although their BET surface area and hydrophobicity were low.


Cellulolytic enzymes Non-productive adsorption Lignin Furfural residues 



This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31800500), the Key R&D project of Shandong (Nos. 2018GSF121031, 2017GGX40106 and 2017GGX70102), the Applied Basic Research Foundation of Qingdao (Nos. 17-1-1-52-jch and 18-2-2-4-jch), the Taishan Scholar Program of Shandong (No. ts201511033), and the Open Project of Guangxi Key Laboratory of Clean Pulp & Papermaking and Pollution Control (No. KF201802-5).


  1. Baldock JA, Smernik RJ (2002) Chemical composition and bioavailability of thermally altered Pinus resinosa (Red pine) wood. Organ Geochem 33:1093–1109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonawitz ND, Kim JIY, Tobimatsu PN, Ciesielski NA, Anderson E (2014) Disruption of mediator rescues the stunted growth of a lignin-deficient Arabidopsis mutant. Nature 509:376–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bu LX, Tang Y, Yang X, Zhang WM, Shang XH, Jiang JX (2014) Comparison of hydrophilic variation and bioethanol production of furfural residues after delignification pretreatment. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 78:1435–1442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carpenter D, Westover TL, Czernik S, Jablonski W (2014) Cheminform abstract: biomass feedstocks for renewable fuel production: a review of the impacts of feedstock and pretreatment on the yield and product distribution of fast pyrolysis bio-oils and vapors. Green Chem 16:384–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Du J, Li Y, Zhang H, Zheng H, Huang H (2014) Factors to decrease the cellulose conversion of enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose at high solid concentrations. Cellulose 21:2409–2417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dumitrache A, Tolbert A, Natzke J, Brown SD, Davison BH, Ragauskas AJ (2017) Cellulose and lignin colocalization at the plant cell wall surface limits microbial hydrolysis of Populus biomass. Green Chem 19:2275–2285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gong CS, Ladisch MR, Tsao GT (2010) Cellobiase from Trichoderma viride: purification, properties, kinetics, and mechanism. Biotechnol Bioeng 19:959–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kawai T, NakazawaH IN, Okada H, Ogasawara W, Morikawa Y, Kobayashi Y (2013) A comprehensive analysis of the effects of the main component enzymes of cellulase derived from Trichoderma reesei on biomass saccharification. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 40:805–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim Y, Ximenes E, Mosier NS, Ladisch MR (2011) Soluble inhibitors/deactivators of cellulase enzymes from lignocellulosic biomass. Enzyme Microb Technol 48:408–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ko JK, Ximenes E, Kim Y, Ladisch MR (2015) Adsorption of enzyme onto lignins of liquid hot water pretreated hardwoods. Biotechnol Bioeng 112:447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kogo T, Yoshida Y, Koganei K, Matsumoto H, Watanabe T, Ogihara J, Kasumi T (2017) Production of rice straw hydrolysis enzymes by the fungi Trichoderma reesei and Humicola insolens using rice straw as a carbon source. Bioresour Technol 233:67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kouisni L, Paleologou M (2015) Method for separating lignin from black liquor. US Patent 20150096697Google Scholar
  13. Leclerc DF (1997) Determination of sodium sulfide and sulfidity in green liquors and smelt solutions. US Patent 5616214Google Scholar
  14. Lei Q, Li WC, Li L, Zhu JQ, Xia L, Li BZ, Yuan YJ (2016) Inhibition of lignin-derived phenolic compounds to cellulase. Biotechnol Biofuels 9:70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lin X, Wu Z, Zhang C, Liu S, Nie S (2018) Enzymatic pulping of lignocellulosic biomass. Ind Crops Prod 120:16–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu H, Sun J, Leu SY, Chen S (2016) Toward a fundamental understanding of cellulase-lignin interactions in the whole slurry enzymatic saccharification process. Biofuel Bioprod Bioresour 10:648–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lou H, Zhou H, Li X, Wang M, Zhu JY, Qiu X (2014) Understanding the effects of lignosulfonate on enzymatic saccharification of pure cellulose. Cellulose 21:1351–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Machado DL, Neto JM, Pradella JG, Bonomi A, Rabelo SC, Da CA (2015) Adsorption characteristics of cellulase and β-glucosidase on avicel, pretreated sugarcane bagasse and lignin. Biotechnol Appl Biochem 62:681–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Martínez AT, Almendros G, González-Vila FJ, Fründ R (1999) Solid-state spectroscopic analysis of lignins from several Austral hardwoods. Solid State Nucl Magn Reson 15:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morone A, Chakrabarti T, Pandey RA (2017) Assessment of alkaline peroxide-assisted wet air oxidation pretreatment for rice straw and its effect on enzymatic hydrolysis. Cellulose 24:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nie S, Zhang C, Zhang Q, Zhang K, Zhang Y, Wang S (2018) Enzymatic and cold alkaline pretreatments of sugarcane bagasse pulp to produce cellulose nanofibrils using a mechanical method. Ind Crops Prod 124:435–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pan X (2008) Role of functional groups in lignin inhibition of enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose to glucose. J Biobased Mater Bio 2:25–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rahikainen J, Mikander S, Marjamaa K, Tamminen T, Lappas A, Viikari L, Kruus K (2011) Inhibition of enzymatic hydrolysis by residual lignins from softwood–study of enzyme binding and inactivation on lignin-rich surface. Biotechnol Bioeng 108:2823–2830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Resch MG, Donohoe BS, Baker JO, Decker SR, Bayer EA, Beckham GT, Himmel ME (2013) Fungal cellulases and complexed cellulosomal enzymes exhibit synergistic mechanisms in cellulose deconstruction. Energy Environ Sci 6:1858–1867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shao Q, Zhao C (2016) Assessment of the lignin-derived inhibition of enzymatic hydrolysis by adding untreated and AFEX-treated lignin isolated from switchgrass. Energy Fuels 30:2823–2834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Siqueira G, Arantes V, Saddler JN, Ferraz A, Milagres AMF (2017) Limitation of cellulose accessibility and unproductive binding of cellulases by pretreated sugarcane bagasse lignin. Biotechnol Biofuels 10:176–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sribala G, Chennuru R, Mahapatra S, Vinu R (2016) Effect of alkaline ultrasonic pretreatment on crystalline morphology and enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. Cellulose 23:1725–1740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stals I, Sandra K, Devreese B, Van BJ, Claeyssens M (2004) Factors influencing glycosylation of trichoderma reesei cellulases. ii: n-glycosylation of cel7a core protein isolated from different strains. Glycobiology 14:725–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Strobel KL, Pfeiffer KA, Blanch HW, Clark DS (2016) Engineering Cel7A Carbohydrate Binding Module and Linker for Reduced Lignin Inhibition. Biotechnol Bioeng 113:1369–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sun S, Huang Y, Sun R, Tu M (2016) The strong association of condensed phenolic moieties in isolated lignins with their inhibition of enzymatic hydrolysis. Green Chem 18:4276–4286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sun J, Qiu M, Shen F, Qi X (2018) Efficient hydrolysis of cellulose to glucose in water by agricultural residue-derived solid acid catalyst. Cellulose 25:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thanaporn L, Benjarat B, Surisa S, Lily E, Verawat C (2015) Synergistic action of recombinant accessory hemicellulolytic and pectinolytic enzymes to Trichoderma reesei cellulase on rice straw degradation. Bioresour Technol 198:682–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang J, Xi J, Wang Y (2015) ChemInform abstract: recent advances in the catalytic production of glucose from lignocellulosic biomass. Green Chem 15:737–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang K, Xie X, Jiang J, Wang J (2016) Sulfolane pretreatment of shrub willow to improve enzymatic saccharification. Cellulose 23:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weiss ND, Felby C, Thygesen LG (2018) Water retention value predicts biomass recalcitrance for pretreated lignocellulosic materials across feedstocks and pretreatment methods. Cellulose 25:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wikberg H, Maunu SL (2004) Characterisation of thermally modified hard- and softwoods by 13C CPMAS NMR. Carbohydr Polym 58:461–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Xiao Z, Zhang X, Gregg DJ, Saddler JN (2004) Effects of sugar inhibition on cellulases and β-glucosidase during enzymatic hydrolysis of softwood substrates. Appl Biochem Biotechnol Part A Enzyme Eng Biotechnol 116(1–3):1115–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yang X, Bu L, Sun D, Liu Z, Liu S, Jiang J (2015) High glucose recovery from direct enzymatic hydrolysis of bisulfite-pretreatment on non-detoxified furfural residues. Bioresour Technol 193:401–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yu H, Tang Y, Xing Y, Zhu LW, Jiang JX (2013) Improvement of the enzymatic hydrolysis of furfural residues by pretreatment with combined green liquor and hydrogen peroxide. Bioresour Technol 147:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yu H, Xing Y, Lie F, Li ZP, Liu ZG, Jiang JX (2014) Improvement of the enzymatic hydrolysis of furfural residues by pretreatment with combined green liquor and ethanol organosolv. Bioresour Technol 167:46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yu H, Li X, Zhang W, Sun D, Jiang J, Liu Z (2015) Hydrophilic pretreatment of furfural residues to improve enzymatic hydrolysis. Cellulose 22:1675–1686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yu H, Xu Y, Ni Y, Wu Q, Liu S, Li L, Yu S, Ji Z (2018) Enhanced enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose from waste paper fibers by cationic polymers addition. Carbohydr Polym 200:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang Z, Vancov T, Mcintosh S, Basu B, Lali A, Qian G (2017) Erratum to: assessing dilute acid pretreatment of different lignocellulosic biomasses for enhanced sugar production. Cellulose 10:1–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory Base of Eco-Chemical Engineering, College of Chemical EngineeringQingdao University of Science and TechnologyQingdaoChina
  2. 2.Guangxi Key Laboratory of Clean Pulp and Papermaking and Pollution Control, College of Light Industry and Food EngineeringGuangxi UniversityNanningChina
  3. 3.Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, MOE Engineering Research Center of Forestry Biomass Materials and BioenergyBeijing Forestry UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations