3 Biotech

, 8:402 | Cite as

Improved production of cellulase by Trichoderma reesei (MTCC 164) from coconut mesocarp-based lignocellulosic wastes under response surface-optimized condition

  • Pinaki DeyEmail author
  • Joginder Singh
  • Jismole Scaria
  • Athira P. Anand
Original Article


Experimental investigations were carried out to develop economic production process of cellulase using coconut mesocarp as an inexpensive lignocellulosic inducer while replacing commercial cellulose. Cellulase production was initially investigated from commercial cellulose in different submerged conditions using Trichoderma reesei (MTCC 164). Maximum enzyme production was achieved 6.3 g/l with activity level 37 FPU/ml in the condition where cellulose to water content ratio was maintained at 5:35 (W/V). To achieve similar maximum production of cellulase from coconut mesocarp, response surface methodology was implemented to optimize most influencing parameters. Most influencing nutritional parameters such as coconut mesocarp, glucose and peptone were optimized in the concentration ranges of 35 g/l, 35 g/l and 25 g/l, respectively. Selecting optimized parameter values, fermentations were conducted inside the fermenter with 2 L operating volume to ensure high concentration and activity profiles of enzyme. Enzyme concentration was achieved 7.20 g/l after 96 h of batch fermentation with specific activity levels of 42 FPU/ ml and CMCase 75 U/ml. Enzyme concentration was further improved to 9.58 g/l with activity levels of 54 FPU/ml and CMCase 93 U/ml by adopting sequential feeding of coconut mesocarp in fed-batch fermentation mode. The presence of pure cellulase in the sample was confirmed by FTIR analysis.


Cellulase Coconut mesocarp Cellulose Response surface methodology Fed-batch cultivation 



The research work was financially supported by Short Term research Grant for the faculty members (Sanctioned Letter: KU/AR/KSTG/32/2017, Sr no 9), Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences (Deemed to be university). Authors are also thankful to each other for their individual support and contribution towards the completion of the research work and writing the paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.


  1. Ahamed A, Vermette P (2010) Effect of mechanical agitation on the production of cellulases by Trichoderma reesei RUT-C30 in a draft-tube airlift bioreactor. Biochem Eng J 49:379–387. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avelino F, Alves G, Ruiz HA et al (2015) Bioethanol production from coconuts and cactus pretreated by autohydrolysis. Ind Crops Prod 77:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballesteros I, Negro MJ, Oliva JM et al (2006) Ethanol production from steam-explosion pretreated wheat straw. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129–132:496–508CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Belghith H, Ellouz-Chaabouni S, Gargouri A (2001) Biostoning of denims by Penicillium occitanis (Pol6) cellulases. J Biotechnol 89:257–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bendig C, Weuster-Botz D (2013) Reaction engineering analysis of cellulase production with Trichoderma reesei RUT-C30 with intermittent substrate supply. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 36:893–900. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohara RA, Thorat ND, Pawar SH (2016) Immobilization of cellulase on functionalized cobalt ferrite nanoparticles. Korean J Chem Eng 33:216–222. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cabral MMS, Abud de AKS, Silva de CEF et al (2016) Bioethanol production from coconut husk fiber. Ciência Rural 46:1872–1877. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cen P, Xia L (1999) Production of cellulase by solid-state fermentation. Springer, Berlin, pp 69–92Google Scholar
  9. Cunha FM, Esperança MN, Zangirolami TC et al (2012) Sequential solid-state and submerged cultivation of Aspergillus niger on sugarcane bagasse for the production of cellulase. Bioresour Technol 112:270–274. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. De Cassia Pereira J, Marques NP, Rodrigues A et al (2015) Thermophilic fungi as new sources for production of cellulases and xylanases with potential use in sugarcane bagasse saccharification. J Appl Microbiol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dey P, Rangarajan V (2017) Improved fed-batch production of high-purity PHB (poly-3 hydroxy butyrate) by Cupriavidus necator (MTCC 1472) from sucrose-based cheap substrates under response surface-optimized conditions. 3 Biotech. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Domingues FC, Queiroz JA, Cabral JMS, Fonseca LP (2001) Production of cellulases in batch culture using a mutant strain of Trichoderma reesei growing on soluble carbon source. Biotechnol Lett 23:771–775. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ebrahimi M, Caparanga AR, Ordono EE, Villaflores OB (2017) Evaluation of organosolv pretreatment on the enzymatic digestibility of coconut coir fibers and bioethanol production via simultaneous saccharification and fermentation. Renew Energy 109:41–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esterbauer H, Steiner W, Labudova I et al (1991) Production of Trichoderma cellulase in laboratory and pilot scale. Bioresour Technol 36:51–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. FAOSTAT Data (2016) The top 5 coconut producing countries. In: FAOSTAT data, 2016 (last accessed by Top 5 Anything January 2016). (Accessed 1 Aug 2017). Accessed 23 May 2018
  16. Ghose TK (1987) Measurement of cellulase activities. Pure Appl Chem 59:257–268. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gonçalves FA, Ruiz HA, Nogueira da CC, et al (2014) Comparison of delignified coconuts waste and cactus for fuel-ethanol production by the simultaneous and semi-simultaneous saccharification and fermentation strategies. Fuel 131:66–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gonçalves FA, Ruiz HA, Silvino dos Santos E et al (2016) Bioethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Pichia stipitis and Zymomonas mobilis from delignified coconut fibre mature and lignin extraction according to biorefinery concept. Renew Energy 94:353–365. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hansen GH, Lübeck M, Frisvad JC et al (2015) Production of cellulolytic enzymes from ascomycetes: comparison of solid state and submerged fermentation. Process Biochem 50:1327–1341. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hasunuma T, Okazaki F, Okai N et al (2013) A review of enzymes and microbes for lignocellulosic biorefinery and the possibility of their application to consolidated bioprocessing technology. Bioresour Technol 135:513–522. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hendy NA, Wilke CR, Blanch HW (1984) Enhanced cellulase production in fed-batch culture of Trichoderma reesei C30. Enzyme Microb Technol 6:73–77. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Howard RL, Abotsi E, Jansen van REL, Howard S (2003) Lignocellulose biotechnology: issues of bioconversion and enzyme production. Afr J Biotechnol 2:602–619. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ito K, Yoshida K, Ishikawa T, Kobayashi S (1990) Volatile compounds produced by the fungus Aspergillus oryzae in rice Koji and their changes during cultivation. J Ferment Bioeng 70:169–172. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Juhász T, Szengyel Z, Réczey K et al (2005) Characterization of cellulases and hemicellulases produced by Trichoderma reesei on various carbon sources. Process Biochem 40:3519–3525. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kataria R, Ghosh S (2011) Saccharification of Kans grass using enzyme mixture from Trichoderma reesei for bioethanol production. Bioresour Technol 102:9970–9975. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kataria R, Ruhal R, Babu R, Ghosh S (2013) Saccharification of alkali treated biomass of Kans grass contributes higher sugar in contrast to acid treated biomass. Chem Eng J 230:36–47. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim I, Han J-I (2012) Optimization of alkaline pretreatment conditions for enhancing glucose yield of rice straw by response surface methodology. Biomass Bioenerg 46:210–217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kovács K, Szakacs G, Zacchi G (2009) Comparative enzymatic hydrolysis of pretreated spruce by supernatants, whole fermentation broths and washed mycelia of Trichoderma reesei and Trichoderma atroviride. Bioresour Technol 100:1350–1357. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Li Y, Liu C, Bai F, Zhao X (2016) Overproduction of cellulase by Trichoderma reesei RUT C30 through batch-feeding of synthesized low-cost sugar mixture. Bioresour Technol 216:503–510. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Loaces I, Schein S, Noya F (2017) Ethanol production by Escherichia coli from Arundo donax biomass under SSF, SHF or CBP process configurations and in situ production of a multifunctional glucanase and xylanase. Bioresour Technol 224:307–313. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Randall FRJ (1951) Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265–275Google Scholar
  32. Lv S, Yu Q, Zhuang X et al (2013) The influence of hemicellulose and lignin removal on the enzymatic digestibility from sugarcane bagasse. Bio Energy Res 6:1128–1134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ma L, Li C, Yang Z et al (2013) Kinetic studies on batch cultivation of Trichoderma reesei and application to enhance cellulase production by fed-batch fermentation. J Biotechnol 166:192–197. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Martinez D, Berka RM, Henrissat B et al (2008) Genome sequencing and analysis of the biomass-degrading fungus Trichoderma reesei (syn. Hypocrea jecorina). Nat Biotechnol 26:553–560. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Menon V, Rao M (2012) Trends in bioconversion of lignocellulose: biofuels, platform chemicals and biorefinery concept. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38:522–550. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miftahul Jannah A, Asip F (2015) Bioethanol production from coconut fiber using alkaline pretreatment and acid hydrolysis method. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 5:320. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller GL, Miller G (1959) Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar no title. Anal Chem 31:426–428. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mishra A, Sardar M (2015) Cellulase assisted synthesis of nano-silver and gold: application as immobilization matrix for biocatalysis. Int J Biol Macromol 77:105–113. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Omojasola PF, Jilani O et al (2008) Cellulase production by some fungi cultured on pineapple waste. Nat Sci 6:64–79Google Scholar
  40. Rana V, Eckard AD, Teller P, Ahring BK (2014) On-site enzymes produced from Trichoderma reesei RUT-C30 and Aspergillus saccharolyticus for hydrolysis of wet exploded corn stover and loblolly pine. Bioresour Technol 154:282–289. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Rawat R, Kumbhar BK, Tewari L (2013) Optimization of alkali pretreatment for bioconversion of poplar (Populus deltoides) biomass into fermentable sugars using response surface methodology. Ind Crops Prod 44:220–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sajith S, Priji P, Sreedevi S, Benjamin S (2016) An overview on fungal cellulases with an industrial perspective. J Nutr Food Sci 6:1–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sateesh L, Rodhe AV, Naseeruddin S et al (2012) Simultaneous cellulase production, saccharification and detoxification using dilute acid hydrolysate of S. spontaneum with Trichoderma reesei NCIM 992 and Aspergillus niger. Indian J Microbiol 52:258–262. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Singhania RR, Sukumaran RK, Patel AK et al (2010) Advancement and comparative profiles in the production technologies using solid-state and submerged fermentation for microbial cellulases. Enzyme Microb Technol 46:541–549. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sluiter A, Hames B, Ruiz R, Scarlata C, Sluiter J, Templeton D, Crocker D et al (2008) Determination of structural carbohydrates and lignin in biomass. Lab Anal Proced 1617:1–16Google Scholar
  46. Soares J, Demeke MM, Foulquié-Moreno MR et al (2016) Green coconut mesocarp pretreated by an alkaline process as raw material for bioethanol production. Bioresour Technol 216:744–753. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Sun S, Li S, Avera BN et al (2017) Soil bacterial and fungal communities show distinct recovery patterns during forest ecosystem restoration. Appl Environ Microbiol 83:e00966–e00917. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Ximenes EA, Dien BS, Ladisch MR et al (2007) Enzyme production by industrially relevant fungi cultured on coproduct from corn dry grind ethanol plants. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 137–140:171–183. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Yang S-T (2007) Bioprocessing for value-added products from renewable resources: new technologies and applications. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. Zdarta J, Jędrzak A, Klapiszewski Ł, Jesionowski T (2017) Immobilization of cellulase on a functional inorganic–organic hybrid support: stability and kinetic study. Catalysts 7:374. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhuang X, Wang W, Yu Q et al (2016) Liquid hot water pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production accompanying with high valuable products. Bioresour Technol 199:68–75. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pinaki Dey
    • 1
    Email author
  • Joginder Singh
    • 2
  • Jismole Scaria
    • 1
  • Athira P. Anand
    • 1
  1. 1.Downstream Processing and Biochemical Engineering Laboratory, Department of BiotechnologyKarunya Institute of Technology and SciencesCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.School of Biotechnology and BiosciencesLovely Professional UniversityPhagwaraIndia

Personalised recommendations