Advertisement

Waste and Biomass Valorization

, Volume 10, Issue 10, pp 2761–2772 | Cite as

Optimization of Down-Stream for Cellulases Produced Under Solid-State Fermentation of Coffee Husk

  • Maria Marín
  • Adriana Artola
  • Antoni SánchezEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

This work systematically studies the downstream process of the solid state fermentation (SSF) of a mixture of coffee husk and wood chips, inoculated with compost, for cellulase production. Downstream of SSF (at pilot scale) remains as one of the less studied stages of the process, being critical in technical, environmental and economic terms. In this study, the specific downstream points considered were: (i) enzyme extraction yield, in terms of extraction ratio solid:solvent, agitation mode and solvent type; (ii) enzymatic activity recovery of the lyophilised extract and (iii) efficiency of consecutive extractions. Results indicate a maximum activity recovery of 108 ± 30% in the extraction performed at ratio 1:5 solid-solvent, in static mode and with distilled water. Statistical analysis revealed a high dispersion of the results and needs to be considered to extract consistent conclusions in any downstream of SSF. Lyophilisation demonstrated to be an adequate technology for enzymatic activity preservation. Regarding consecutive extractions, yield recovery in the first and second extraction maintain a similar value. In a framework of a zero-waste enzyme production process, different strategies have been tested for the remaining solid after extraction. Respirometric tests reveal that it is possible to aerobically stabilize the remaining solid obtaining a compost like material, whereas anaerobic digestion resulted in low methane yields (51 ± 3 mL methane g−1 VS).

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Cellulase extraction Activity recovery Solid state fermentation Down-stream Zero waste process 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, which gave financial support (Project CTM2015-69513-R) to this work. Maria Marín also thanks the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona for a predoctoral scholarship.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Kuhad, R.C., Gupta, R., Singh, A.: Microbial cellulases and their industrial applications. Enzyme Res.  https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/280696 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cherian, E., Dharmendirakumar, M., Baskar, G.: Immobilization of cellulase onto MnO2 nanoparticles for bioethanol production by enhanced hydrolysis of agricultural waste. Chin. J. Catal. 36(8), 1223–1229 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Idris, A.S.O., Pandey, A., Rao, S.S., Sukumaran, R.K.: Cellulase production through solid-state tray fermentation, and its use for bioethanol from Sorghum stover. Bioresour. Technol. 242, 265–271 (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li, Y.H., Zhang, X.Y., Xiong, L., Mehmood, M.A., Zhao, X.Q., Bai, F.W.: On-site cellulase production and efficient saccharification of corn stover employing cbh2 overexpressing Trichoderma reesei with novel induction system. Bioresour. Technol. 238, 643–649 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oke, A.M., Suffian, M., Annuar, M., Simarani, K.: Mixed lignocellulosic biomass degradation and utilization for bacterial cellulase production. Waste Biomass Valoriz. 8(3), 893–903 (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saini, A., Aggarwal, N.K., Yadav, A.: Cost-effective cellulase production using parthenium hysterophorus biomass as an unconventional lignocellulosic substrate. 3 Biotech 7(1), 1–11 (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sun, H.Y., Li, J.H., Zhao, P.J., Peng, M.: Banana peel: a novel substrate for cellulase production under solid-state fermentation. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10(77), 17887–17890 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dhillon, G.S., Kaur, S., Brar, S.K., Verma, M.: Potential of apple pomace as a solid substrate for fungal cellulase and hemicellulase bioproduction through solid-state fermentation. Ind. Crop Prod. 38, 6–13 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoon, L.W., Ang, T.N., Ngoh, G.C., Chua, A.S.M.: Fungal solid-state fermentation and various methods of enhancement in cellulase production. Biomass Bioenergy 67, 319–338 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trivedi, N., Reddy, C.R.K., Radulovich, R., Jha, B.: Solid state fermentation (ssf)-derived cellulase for saccharification of the Green Seaweed Ulva for bioethanol production. Algal Res. 9, 48–54 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cerda, A., Gea, T., Vargas-Garcia, M.C., Sanchez, A.: Towards a competitive solid state fermentation: cellulases production from coffee husk by sequential batch operation and role of microbial diversity. Sci. Total Environ. 589, 56–65 (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maulini-Duran, C., Puyuelo, B., Artola, A., Font, X., Sanchez, A., Gea, T.: VOC emissions from the composting of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste using standard and advanced aeration strategies. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 89(4), 579–586 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Puyuelo, B., Gea, T., Sanchez, A.: A new control strategy for the composting process based on the oxygen uptake rate. Chem. Eng. J. 165(1), 161–169 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pirota, R.D.P.B., Miotto, L.S., Delabona, P.S., Farinas, C.S.: Improving the extraction conditions of endoglucanase produced by Aspergillus niger under solid-state fermentation. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 30(1), 117–123 (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chandra, M.S., Viswanath, B., Reddy, B.R.: Optimization of extraction of β-endoglucanase from the fermented bran of Aspergillus niger. Indian J. Microbiol. 50(1), 122–126 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Farinas, C.S., Loyo, M.M., Junior, B.A., Tardioli, P.W., Neto, V.B., Couri, V.: Finding stable cellulase and xylanase: evaluation of the synergistic effect of pH and temperatura. New Biotechnol. 27(6), 810–815 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Ordinance on environmentally compatible storage of waste from human settlements and on biological waste treatment facilities of 20 February (2001). http://www.bmu.de/files/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/ablagerungsverordnung.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2017
  19. 19.
    Ponsá, S., Gea, T., Sánchez, A.: Anaerobic co-digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste with several pure organic co-substrates. Biosyst. Eng. 108(4), 352–360 (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sayara, T., Sarrà, M., Sánchez, A.: Effects of compost stability and contaminant concentration on the bioremediation of PAHs-contaminated soil through composting. J. Hazard. Mater. 179(1–3), 999–1006 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ghose, T.K.: Measurement of cellulase activities. Pure Appl. Chem. 59(2), 257–268 (1987)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Adani, F., Gigliotti, G., Valentini, F., Laraia, R.: Respiration index determination: a comparative study of different methods. Compost. Sci. Util. 11(2), 144–151 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pognani, M., Barrena, R., Font, X., Adani, F., Scaglia, B., Sanchez, A.: Evolution of organic matter in a full-scale composting plant for the treatment of sewage sludge and biowaste by respiration techniques and pyrolysis-GC/MS. Bioresour. Technol. 102(6), 4536–4543 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gea, T., Barrena, R., Artola, A., Sanchez, A.: Monitoring the biological activity of the composting process: oxygen uptake rate (OUR), respirometric index (RI), and respiratory quotient (RQ). Biotechnol. Bioeng. 88(4), 520–527 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Almeira, N., Komilis, D., Barrena, R., Gea, T., Sánchez, A.: The importance of aeration mode and flowrate in the determination of the biological activity and stability of organic wastes by respiration indices. Bioresour. Technol. 196, 256–262 (2015)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    The U.S. Department of Agriculture and The U.S. Composting Council: Test Methods for the Examination of Composting and Compost. Edaphos International, Houston (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Van Soest, P., Robertson, J., Lewis, B.: Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74(10), 3583–3597 (1991)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Miller, G.: Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Anal. Chem. 31(3), 426–428 (1959)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ruggieri, L., Gea, T., Artola, A., Sanchez, A.: Air filled porosity measurements by air pycnometry in the composting process: a review and a correlation analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 100(10), 2655–2666 (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Krishna, C.: Solid-state fermentation systems: an overview. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 25(1–2), 1–30 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Alburquerque, J.A., McCartney, D., Yu, S., Brown, L., Leonard, J.J.: Air space in composting research: a literature review. Compost. Sci. Util. 16(3), 159–170 (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sarkar, N., Ghosh, S.K., Bannerjee, S., Aikat, K.: Bioethanol production from agricultural wastes: an overview. Renew Energ 37, 19–27 (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jimenez-Penalver, P., Gea, T., Sanchez, A., Font, X.: Production of sophorolipids from winterization oil cake by solid-state fermentation: optimization, monitoring and effect of mixing. Biochem. Eng. J. 115, 93–100 (2016)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rezaei, F., Joh, L.D., Kashima, H., Reddy, A.P., VanderGheynst, J.S.: Selection of conditions for cellulase and xylanase extraction from switchgrass colonized by Acidothermus cellulolyticus. Appl Biochem. Biotech. 164(6), 793–803 (2011)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Singh, S.A., Ramakrishna, M., Appu Rao, A.G.: Optimisation of downstream processing parameters for the recovery of pectinase from the fermented bran of Aspergillus carbonarius. Process Biochem. 35(3–4), 411–417 (1999)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bera, M.B., Panesar, P.S., Panesar, R., Singh, B.: Application of reverse micelle extraction process for amylase recovery using response surface methodology. Bioproc. Biosyst. Eng. 31(4), 379–384 (2008)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shata, H.M.A.: Extraction of milk-clotting enzyme produced by solid state fermentation of Aspergillus oryzae. Pol J Microbiol 54(3), 241–247 (2005)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Díaz, A.B., Caro, I., de Ory, I., Blandino, A.: Evaluation of the conditions for the extraction of hydrolitic enzymes obtained by solid state fermentation from grape pomace. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 41, 302–306 (2007)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hédoux, A., Paccou, L., Achir, S., Guinet, Y.: In situ monitoring of proteins during lyophilization using micro-raman spectroscopy: a description of structural changes induced by dehydration. J. Pharm. Sci. 101(7), 2316–2326 (2012)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Passot, S., Trelea, I.C., Marin, M., Galan, M., Morris, G.J., Fonseca, F.: Effect of controlled ice nucleation on primary drying stage and protein recovery in vials cooled in a modified freeze-dryer. J. Biomech. Eng. 131(7), 74511 (2009)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mancini, G., Papirio, S., Lens, P.N.L., Esposito, G.: Effect of N-methylmorpholine- N-oxide pretreatment on biogas production from rice straw, cocoa shell, and hazelnut skin. Environ. Eng. Sci. 33(11), 843–850 (2016)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ammenberg, J., Feiz, R.: Assessment of feedstocks for biogas production, part II: results for strategic decision making. Resour. Conserv. Recyl. 122, 388–404 (2017)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lee, L.W., Tay, G.Y., Cheong, M.W., Curran, P., Yu, B., Liu, S.Q.: Modulation of the volatile and non-volatile profiles of coffee fermented with Yarrowia lipolytica: II. Roasted coffee. Lebensm-Wiss Technol. 80, 32–42 (2017)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kim, E., Lee, D.H., Won, S., Ahn, H.: Evaluation of optimum moisture content for composting of beef manure and bedding material mixtures using oxygen uptake measurement. Asian Austral. J. Anim. 29(5), 753–758 (2016)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Richard, T.L., Hamelers, H.V.M., Veeken, A., Silva, T.: Moisture relationships in composting processes. Compost. Sci. Util. 10(4), 286–302 (2002)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Komilis, D., Kanellos, D.: A modified dynamic respiration test to assess compost stability: effect of sample size and air flowrate. Bioresour. Technol. 117, 300–309 (2012)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zulkepli, N.E., Muis, Z.A., Mahmood, N.A.N., Hashim, H., Ho, W.S.: Cost benefit analysis of composting and anaerobic digestion in a community: a review. Chem. Eng. Trans. 56, 1777–1782 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Composting Research Group, Department of Chemical, Biological and Environmental EngineeringUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaCerdanyola del VallèsSpain

Personalised recommendations