4.7 Article

Sequential white-rot and brown-rot fungal pretreatment of wheat straw as a promising alternative for complementary mild treatments

期刊

WASTE MANAGEMENT
卷 79, 期 -, 页码 240-250

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.07.044

关键词

Wheat straw; Agricultural waste; Biological pretreatment; White-rot fungus; Brown-rot fungus; Cellulose hydrolysis

资金

  1. CONICYT Doctoral scholarship [21120634]
  2. FAPERJ-UFRO [FPJ15-0005]
  3. [CONICYT/FONDAP/15130015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

White-rot and brown-rot fungi have complementary mechanisms to selectively degrade lignin and holocellullose, respectively. Thereby, a fungal co-culture of a white-rot and a brown-rot fungal could result in efficient strategy for a mild lignocellulosic biomass pretreatment. In this work, single, sequential and co-inoculation of the selective-lignin degrading white-rot fungus Ganoderma lobatum and the brown-rot fungus Gloeophyllum trabeum were evaluated as biological pretreatments of wheat straw to enhance enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. The single cultures of G. lobatum and G. trabeum exhibited preferential degradation of lignin and hemicellulose, respectively. The total crystallinity index decreased in samples pretreated with G. trabeum but not with G. lobatum. The pretreatment with single cultures of G. lobatum or G. trabeum increased glucose yields by 43.6% and 26.1% respectively compared to untreated straw. Although co-inoculation resulted in higher yields of glucose when compared with single cultures, only a slight synergistic effect between fungi was observed. Contrary, the sequential inoculation of G. lobatum incubated for 10 days followed by G. trabeum incubated for 10 days more showed a strong synergic effect on enzymatic hydrolysis. This sequential culture showed the highest glucose yield (191.5 mg g(-1) wheat straw), 2.8-fold higher than untreated wheat straw, and 140-150% higher than the single-cultures of G. lobatum and G. trabeum, respectively. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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