4.5 Article

Enzymatic hydrolysis of sugarcane bagasse for bioethanol production: determining optimal enzyme loading using neural networks

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.2391

关键词

enzymatic hydrolysis; sugarcane bagasse; enzyme loading, optimization; modeling; artificial intelligence

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The efficient production of a fermentable hydrolyzate is an immensely important requirement in the utilization of lignocellulosic biomass as a feedstock in bioethanol production processes. The identification of the optimal enzyme loading is of particular importance to maximize the amount of glucose produced from lignocellulosic materials while maintaining low costs. This requirement can only be achieved by incorporating reliable methodologies to properly address the optimization problem. RESULTS: In this work, a data-driven technique based on artificial neural networks and design of experiments have been integrated in order to identify the optimal enzyme combination. The enzymatic hydrolysis of sugarcane bagasse was used as a case study. This technique was used to build up a model of the combined effects of cellulase (FPU/L) and beta-glucosidase (CBU/L) loads on glucose yield (%) after enzymatic hydrolysis. The optimal glucose yield, above 99%, was achieved with cellulase and beta-glucosidase concentrations in the ranges of 460.0 to 580.0 FPU L-1 (15.3-19.3 FPU g(-1) bagasse) and 750.0 to 1140.0 CBU L-1 (2-38 CBU g(-1) bagasse), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic model developed can be used not only to the prediction of glucose concentration profiles for different enzymatic loadings, but also to obtain the optimum enzymes loading that leads to high glucose yield. It can promote both a successful hydrolysis process control and a more effective employment of enzymes. (C) 2010 Society of Chemical Industry

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据