Advertisement

BioEnergy Research

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 835–849 | Cite as

Simultaneous Pretreatment and Biohydrogen Production from Wheat Straw by Newly Isolated Ligninolytic Bacillus Sp. Strains with Two-Stage Batch Fermentation System

  • Tawaf Ali Shah
  • Shehbaz Ali
  • Asifa Afzal
  • Romana Tabassum
Article
  • 87 Downloads

Abstract

Biodegradation of agribiomass especially wheat straw to biohydrogen and biomethane is an encouraging approach to the current waste management problem. To do so, the biomass must first be pretreated to break down lignin thereby increasing accessibility of the substrate to fermentative organisms. In the current study, out of 20 isolates from the granular sludge of full-scale anaerobic digester, four ligninolytic Bacillus sp. strains were selected based on their lignin and Azure B degradation. Further, among the four isolates, Brevibacillus agri AN-3 exhibited the highest of 88.4 and 78.1% decrease in COD of lignin and Azure B respectively. These strains were also found to secrete optimum yields of lignin peroxidase (LiP) at pH 3, laccase (Lac) at pH 5, and xylanase and cellulase enzymes at pH 7. The strains demonstrated maximum activity of Lip and Lac at 50 °C and xylanase and cellulase at 60 °C after 72-h growth. Among the four strains, Brevibacillus agri AN-3 showed hydrogen (H2) yield of 1.34 and 2.9 mol-H2/mol from xylose and cellulose respectively. In two-phase wheat straw batch fermentation, Brevibacillus agri AN-3 produced 88.3 and 283.7 mL/gVS cumulative H2 and methane (CH4) respectively. Biotreatment with ligninolytic Bacillus sp. strains perceived that 261.4% more methane yield could be obtained from the wheat straw than using the untreated wheat straw in batch fermentation. This is the first study establishing not only the hydrogen potential of ligninolytic Bacillus sp. strains but also indicates a vital role of these species in developing standard inoculum and a biocatalyst for processing agribiomass.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Anaerobic ligninolytic Fermentation Bacillus sp. strains Lignocellulosic waste biomass 

Notes

Funding Information

This work is supported by the Pak-US project entitled “Solid waste management for bioenergy production” and International Research Support Initiative Programme (IRSIP), H9 Islamabad, Pakistan.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

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

References

  1. 1.
    Herrmann A (2013) Biogas production from maize: current state, challenges and prospects. 2. Agronomic and environmental aspects. BioEnerg Res 6(1):372–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Oke MA, Annuar MSM, Simarani K (2016) Mixed feedstock approach to lignocellulosic ethanol production—prospects and limitations. BioEnerg Res 9(4):1189–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Orts WJ, McMahan CM (2016) Biorefinery developments for advanced biofuels from a sustainable array of biomass feedstocks: survey of recent biomass conversion research from agricultural research service. BioEnerg Res 9(2):430–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kandhola G, Djioleu A, Carrier DJ, Kim J-W (2017) Pretreatments for enhanced enzymatic hydrolysis of pinewood: a review. BioEnerg Res 10(4):1138–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herrmann C, Heiermann M, Idler C, Prochnow A (2012) Particle size reduction during harvesting of crop feedstock for biogas production i: effects on ensiling process and methane yields. BioEnerg Res 5(4):926–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alvarez-Vasco C, Guo M, Zhang X (2015) Dilute acid pretreatment of Douglas fir forest residues: pretreatment yield, hemicellulose degradation, and enzymatic hydrolysability. BioEnerg Res 8(1):42–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu F, Ragauskas A (2012) Pretreatment and lignocellulosic chemistry. BioEnerg Res 5(4):1043–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Balussou D, Kleyböcker A, McKenna R, Möst D, Fichtner W (2012) An economic analysis of three operational co-digestion biogas plants in Germany. Waste Biomass Valori 3(1):23–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elumalai S, Espinosa AR, Markley JL, Runge TM (2014) Combined sodium hydroxide and ammonium hydroxide pretreatment of post-biogas digestion dairy manure fiber for cost effective cellulosic bioethanol production. Sustain Chem Process 2(1):12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shrestha S, Fonoll X, Khanal SK, Raskin L (2017) Biological strategies for enhanced hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass during anaerobic digestion: current status and future perspectives. Bioresour Technol 245 (part a):1245-1257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gómez X, Cuetos M, Tartakovsky B, Martinez-Nunez M, Moran A (2010) A comparison of analytical techniques for evaluating food waste degradation by anaerobic digestion. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 33(4):427–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hidalgo D, Martín-Marroquín JM, Sastre E (2014) Single-phase and two-phase anaerobic co-digestion of residues from the treatment process of waste vegetable oil and pig manure. BioEnerg Res 7(2):670–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akobi C, Yeo H, Hafez H, Nakhla G (2016) Single-stage and two-stage anaerobic digestion of extruded lignocellulosic biomass. Appl Energ 184:548–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheng J, Ding L, Lin R, Yue L, Liu J, Zhou J, Cen K (2016) Fermentative biohydrogen and biomethane co-production from mixture of food waste and sewage sludge: effects of physiochemical properties and mix ratios on fermentation performance. Appl Energ 184:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghimire A, Frunzo L, Pirozzi F, Trably E, Escudie R, Lens PN, Esposito G (2015) A review on dark fermentative biohydrogen production from organic biomass: process parameters and use of by-products. Appl Energ 144:73–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hawkes FR, Hussy I, Kyazze G, Dinsdale R, Hawkes DL (2007) Continuous dark fermentative hydrogen production by mesophilic microflora: principles and progress. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 32(2):172–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Bere L (2000) Anaerobic digestion of solid waste: state-of-the-art. Water Sci Ttechnol 41(3):283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dias AA, Freitas GS, Marques GS, Sampaio A, Fraga IS, Rodrigues MA, Evtuguin DV, Bezerra RM (2010) Enzymatic saccharification of biologically pre-treated wheat straw with white-rot fungi. Bioresour Technol 101(15):6045–6050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim YS, Singh AP, Nilsson T (1996) Bacteria as important degraders in waterlogged archaeological woods. Holzforschung-Intl J Biol, Chem, Physic Technol Wood 50(5):389–392Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ruiz-Dueñas FJ, Martínez ÁT (2009) Microbial degradation of lignin: how a bulky recalcitrant polymer is efficiently recycled in nature and how we can take advantage of this. Microbial Biotechnol 2(2):164–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chandra R, Raj A, Purohit H, Kapley A (2007) Characterisation and optimisation of three potential aerobic bacterial strains for kraft lignin degradation from pulp paper waste. Chemosphere 67(4):839–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abd-Elsalam HE, El-Hanafy AA (2009) Lignin biodegradation with ligninolytic bacterial strain and comparison of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus sp. isolated from Egyptian soil. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 5:39–44Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grishchenkov V, Townsend R, McDonald T, Autenrieth R, Bonner J, Boronin A (2000) Degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons by facultative anaerobic bacteria under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Process Biochem 35(9):889–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Minu K, Jiby KK, Kishore V (2012) Isolation and purification of lignin and silica from the black liquor generated during the production of bioethanol from rice straw. Biomass Bioenergy 39:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Picart P, Wiermans L, Ma P-S, Grande PM, Schallmey A, Domínguez de María P (2016) Assessing lignin types to screen novel biomass-degrading microbial strains: synthetic lignin as useful carbon source. ACS Sustain Chem & Eng 4(3):651–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Adesina F, Onilude A (2013) Isolation, identification and screening of xylanase and glucanase-producing microfungi from degrading wood in Nigeria. African J Agri Res 8(34):4414–4421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shah A, Favaro L, Alibardi L, Cagnin L, Sandon A, Cossu R, Casella S, Basaglia M (2016) Bacillus sp. strains to produce bio-hydrogen from the organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Appl Energ 176:116–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aljanabi SM, Martinez I (1997) Universal and rapid salt-extraction of high quality genomic DNA for PCR-based techniques. Nucleic Acids Res 25(22):4692–4693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ (1991) 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol 173(2):697–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lou XF, Nair J, Ho G (2012) Influence of food waste composition and volumetric water dilution on methane generation kinetics. Intl J Environ Protect 2:22–29Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sluiter A, Sluiter J, Wolfrum EJ (2013) Methods for biomass compositional analysis. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO.,Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Saitou N, Nei M (1987) The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 4(4):406–425PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ahmad M, Roberts JN, Hardiman EM, Singh R, Eltis LD, Bugg TD (2011) Identification of DypB from Rhodococcus jostii RHA1 as a lignin peroxidase. Biochem 50(23):5096–5107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Duan J, Huo X, Du W, Liang J, Wang D, Yang S (2016) Biodegradation of kraft lignin by a newly isolated anaerobic bacterial strain, Acetoanaerobium sp. WJDL-Y2. Lett Appl Microbiol 62(1):55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chandra R, Abhishek A, Sankhwar M (2011) Bacterial decolorization and detoxification of black liquor from rayon grade pulp manufacturing paper industry and detection of their metabolic products. Bioresour Technol 102(11):6429–6436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chen Y, Chai L, Zhu Y, Yang Z, Zheng Y, Zhang H (2012) Biodegradation of kraft lignin by a bacterial strain Comamonas sp. B-9 isolated from eroded bamboo slips. J Appl Microbiol 112(5):900–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chantarasiri A, Boontanom P (2017) Decolorization of synthetic dyes by ligninolytic Lysinibacillus sphaericus JD1103 isolated from Thai wetland ecosystems. AACL Bioflux 10(4):814–819Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dawkar VV, Jadhav UU, Telke AA, Govindwar SP (2009) Peroxidase from Bacillus sp. VUS and its role in the decolorization of textile dyes. Biotechnol. Bioprocess Eng 14(3):361–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Santos A, Mendes S, Brissos V, Martins LO (2014) New dye-decolorizing peroxidases from Bacillus subtilis and Pseudomonas putida MET94: towards biotechnological applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98(5):2053–2065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Martín del Campo JS, Rollin J, Myung S, Chun Y, Chandrayan S, Patiño R, Adams MW, Zhang YHP (2013) High-yield production of dihydrogen from xylose by using a synthetic enzyme cascade in a cell-free system. Angewandte Chemie Intl Edition 52(17):4587–4590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Reginatto V, Antônio RV (2015) Fermentative hydrogen production from agroindustrial lignocellulosic substrates. Brazilian J Microbiol 46(2):323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kumar P, Patel SK, Lee J-K, Kalia VC (2013) Extending the limits of Bacillus for novel biotechnological applications. Biotechnol Adv 31(8):1543–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Xing Y, Ma H, Fan Y, Hou H, Chen J (2009) Cellulose-hydrogen production from corn stalk biomass by anaerobic fermentation. Chin Sci Bull 54(8):1434–1441Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fan Y-T, Zhang Y-H, Zhang S-F, Hou H-W, Ren B-Z (2006) Efficient conversion of wheat straw wastes into biohydrogen gas by cow dung compost. Bioresour Technol 97(3):500–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li Y-C, Liu Y-F, Chu C-Y, Chang P-L, Hsu C-W, Lin P-J, Wu S-Y (2012) Techno-economic evaluation of biohydrogen production from wastewater and agricultural waste. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 37(20):15704–15710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Li Q, Liu C-Z (2012) Co-culture of Clostridium thermocellum and Clostridium thermosaccharolyticum for enhancing hydrogen production via thermophilic fermentation of cornstalk waste. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 37(14):10648–10654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Patel SKS, Kumar P, Mehariya S, Purohit HJ, Lee J-K, Kalia VC (2014) Enhancement in hydrogen production by co-cultures of Bacillus and Enterobacter. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 39(27):14663–14668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fang H, Li C, Zhang T (2006) Acidophilic biohydrogen production from rice slurry. Intl J Hydrog Energ 31(6):683–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Shin H-S, Youn J-H, Kim S-H (2004) Hydrogen production from food waste in anaerobic mesophilic and thermophilic acidogenesis. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 29(13):1355–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Müller H, Trösch W (1986) Screening of white-rot fungi for biological pretreatment of wheat straw for biogas production. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 24(2):180–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Krishania M, Vijay VK Comparison of various pretreatments of wheat straw for biomethanation. In: Sustainable Technologies (WCST), 2012 World congress on, 2012. IEEE, pp 78–82Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Weiß S, Somitsch W, Klymiuk I, Trajanoski S, Guebitz GM (2016) Comparison of biogas sludge and raw crop material as source of hydrolytic cultures for anaerobic digestion. Bioresour Technol 207:244–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bugg TD, Ahmad M, Hardiman EM, Singh R (2011) The emerging role for bacteria in lignin degradation and bio-product formation. Curr Opin Biotechnol 22(3):394–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tuomela M, Vikman M, Hatakka A, Itävaara M (2000) Biodegradation of lignin in a compost environment: a review. Bioresour Technol 72(2):169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nasirian N, Almassi M, Minaei S, Widmann R (2011) Development of a method for biohydrogen production from wheat straw by dark fermentation. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 36(1):411–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Reilly M, Dinsdale R, Guwy A (2014) Mesophilic biohydrogen production from calcium hydroxide treated wheat straw. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 39(30):16891–16901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Nkemka VN, Murto M (2013) Biogas production from wheat straw in batch and UASB reactors: the roles of pretreatment and seaweed hydrolysate as a co-substrate. Bioresour Technol 128:164–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chandra R, Takeuchi H, Hasegawa T, Kumar R (2012) Improving biodegradability and biogas production of wheat straw substrates using sodium hydroxide and hydrothermal pretreatments. Energy 43(1):273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ivanova G, Rákhely G, Kovács KL (2009) Thermophilic biohydrogen production from energy plants by Caldicellulosiruptor saccharolyticus and comparison with related studies. Intl J Hydrogen Energ 34(9):3659–3670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kaparaju P, Serrano M, Thomsen AB, Kongjan P, Angelidaki I (2009) Bioethanol, biohydrogen and biogas production from wheat straw in a biorefinery concept. Bioresour Technol 100(9):2562–2568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Mustafa AM, Poulsen TG, Sheng K (2016) Fungal pretreatment of rice straw with Pleurotus ostreatus and Trichoderma reesei to enhance methane production under solid-state anaerobic digestion. Appl Energ 180:661–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kongjan P, Angelidaki I (2010) Extreme thermophilic biohydrogen production from wheat straw hydrolysate using mixed culture fermentation: effect of reactor configuration. Bioresour Technol 101(20):7789–7796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Patel SK, Singh M, Kalia VC (2011) Hydrogen and polyhydroxybutyrate producing abilities of Bacillus spp. from glucose in two stage system. Ind. J Microbiol 51(4):418Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ozbayram EG, Kleinsteuber S, Nikolausz M, Ince B, Ince O (2017) Effect of bioaugmentation by cellulolytic bacteria enriched from sheep rumen on methane production from wheat straw. Anaerobe 46:122–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Fuess LT, Kiyuna LSM, Ferraz ADN, Persinoti GF, Squina FM, Garcia ML, Zaiat M (2017) Thermophilic two-phase anaerobic digestion using an innovative fixed-bed reactor for enhanced organic matter removal and bioenergy recovery from sugarcane vinasse. Appl Energ 189:480–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Schievano A, Tenca A, Lonati S, Manzini E, Adani F (2014) Can two-stage instead of one-stage anaerobic digestion really increase energy recovery from biomass? Appl Energ 124:335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Vasmara C, Cianchetta S, Marchetti R, Galletti S (2015) Biogas production from wheat straw pre-treated with ligninolytic fungi and co-digestion with pig slurry. Environ Eng Manag J 14:1751–1760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ghosh S, Chowdhury R, Bhattacharya P (2017) Sustainability of cereal straws for the fermentative production of second generation biofuels: a review of the efficiency and economics of biochemical pretreatment processes. Appl Energ 198:284–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tawaf Ali Shah
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shehbaz Ali
    • 1
    • 2
  • Asifa Afzal
    • 1
    • 2
  • Romana Tabassum
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering (NIBGE)FaisalabadPakistan
  2. 2.Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Science (PIEAS)IslamabadPakistan

Personalised recommendations