Advertisement

Preparation and Evaluation of Lignocellulosic Biomass Hydrolysates for Growth by Ethanologenic Yeasts

  • Ying ZhaEmail author
  • Ronald Slomp
  • Johan van Groenestijn
  • Peter J. Punt
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 834)

Abstract

Lignocellulosic biomass is a potential feedstock for bioethanol production. Biomass hydrolysates, prepared with a procedure including pretreatment and hydrolysis, are considered to be used as fermentation media for microorganisms, such as yeast. During the hydrolysate preparation procedure, toxic compounds are released or formed which may inhibit the growth of the microorganism and thus the product formation. To study the effects of these compounds on fermentation performance, the production of various hydrolysates with diverse inhibitory effects is of importance. A platform of methods that generates hydrolysates through four different ways and tests their inhibitory effects using Bioscreen C Analyzer growth tests is described here. The four methods, based on concentrated acid, dilute acid, mild alkaline and alkaline/oxidative conditions, were used to prepare hydrolysates from six different biomass sources. The resulting 24 hydrolysates showed great diversity on growth rate in Bioscreen C Analyzer growth tests. The approach allows the prediction of a specific hydrolysate’s performance and helps to select biomass type and hydrolysate preparation method for a specific production strain, or vice versa.

Key words

Lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysate Bioscreen C analyzer Ethanologenic yeast Inhibitory effect Growth rate 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This project was co-financed by the Netherlands Metabolomics (NMC) which is part of the Netherlands Genomics Initiative/Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research.

References

  1. 1.
    Almeida JRM, Karhumaa K, Bengtsson O, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2009) Screening of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains with respect to anaerobic growth in non-detoxified lignocellulose hydrolysate. Bioresource Technology 100(14):3674–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Modig T, Almeida JRM, Gorwa-Grauslund MF, Lidén G (2008) Variability of the response of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains to lignocellulose hydrolysate. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 100(3):423–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tofighi A, Azin M, Mazaheri Assadi M, Assadi-rad MHA, Nejadsattari T, Fallahian MR (2010) Inhibitory effect of high concentrations of furfural on industrial strain of saccharomyces cerevisiae. International Journal of Environmental Research 4(1):137–42Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Albers E, Larsson C (2009) A comparison of stress tolerance in YPD and industrial lignocellulose-based medium among industrial and laboratory yeast strains. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology 36(8):1085–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martín C, Jönsson LJ (2003) Comparison of the resistance of industrial and laboratory strains of Saccharomyces and Zygosaccharomyces to lignocellulose-derived fermentation inhibitors. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 32(3-4):386–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klinke HB, Thomsen AB, Ahring BK (2004) Inhibition of ethanol-producing yeast and bacteria by degradation products produced during pre-treatment of biomass. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 66(1):10–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000) Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: inhibition and detoxification. Bioresource Technology 74(1):17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Almeida JRM, Modig T, Petersson A, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2007) Increased tolerance and conversion of inhibitors in lignocellulosic hydrolysates by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 82(4):340–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nichols NN, Sharma LN, Mowery RA, Chambliss CK, van Walsum GP, Dien BS, Iten LB (2008) Fungal metabolism of fermentation inhibitors present in corn stover dilute acid hydrolysate. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 5;42(7):624–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heer D, Sauer U (2008) Identification of furfural as a key toxin in lignocellulosic hydrolysates and evolution of a tolerant yeast strain. Microb Biotechnol 1:497–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xia J, Psychogios N, Young N, Wishart DS (2009) MetaboAnalyst: A web server for metabolomic data analysis and interpretation. Nucleic Acids Research 37Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Braaksma M, van den Berg RA, van der Werf MJ, Punt PJ (2010) A top-down systems biology approach for the identification of targets for fungal strain and process development. In: Borkovich KA, Ebbole DJ (ed) Cellular and molecular biology of filamentous fungi. ASM Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Franden MA, Pienkos PT, Zhang M (2009) Development of a high-throughput method to evaluate the impact of inhibitory compounds from lignocellulosic hydrolysates on the growth of Zymomonas mobilis. Journal of Biotechnology 144(4):259–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Hoek P, van Dijken JP, Pronk JT (1998) Effect of specific growth rate on fermentative capacity of baker’s yeast. Appl Environ Microbiol. 64(11):4226–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhao X, Peng F, Cheng K, Liu D (2009) Enhancement of the enzymatic digestibility of sugarcane bagasse by alkali-peracetic acid ­pretreatment. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 44(1):17–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ying Zha
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ronald Slomp
    • 1
  • Johan van Groenestijn
    • 1
  • Peter J. Punt
    • 1
  1. 1.TNO Microbiology and Systems BiologyZeistThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations