4.7 Article

Lipid production from corn stover by a cost-efficient system featuring ammonium carbonate-steam explosion and recirculating enzymatic hydrolysis

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 120, 期 -, 页码 387-395

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.11.020

关键词

Lignocellulosic biomass; Corn stover; Single cell oil; Ammonium carbonate-steam explosion; Recirculating enzymatic hydrolysis; Cryptococcus podzolicus

资金

  1. Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2014GXZ0005, 2018GZ0375, 2018TJPT0004]
  2. National Infrastructure of Natural Resources for Science and Technology Program of China [NIMR-2018-8]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A cost-efficient system was developed for the production of single cell oil from lignocellulosic biomass. The pretreatment of corn stover by ammonium carbonate -steam explosion was performed. A maximum lignin removal rate of 47.26% was observed and confirmed by SEM, XRD and FTIR. In the process of enzymatic hydrolysis, higher initial enzyme loadings were used to reduce the reaction time to 24 h. Under these conditions, the sugar conversion, sugar conversion rate and sugar yield of the pretreated corn stover were 74.84%, 2.00 g L-1 and 479.4 g kg(-1) corn stover, respectively. The biomass production, lipid concentration and lipid content of Cryptococcus podzolicus SCTCC300292 were 10.56 gL(-1) 5.03 g L-1 and 47.60%, respectively, in the fermentation of enzymatic hydrolysate. An improved cycling process of enzymatic hydrolysis was employed to reduce the enzyme loading by 40%. The sugar conversion increased to 80.17% and the sugar yield to 513.45 g kg(-1) corn stover with a higher sugar release rate of 2.14 g L-1 h(-1). Furthermore, the lipid yield reached 54.6 g kg(-1) corn stover for the whole biorefinery process. These results indicated that the process of ammonium carbonate-steam explosion pretreatment and recirculated enzymatic hydrolysis would be a highly efficient path for converting lignocellulosic feedstocks into lipids.

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