4.5 Article

Studies on delignification and inhibitory enzyme kinetics of alkaline peroxide pre-treated pine and deodar saw dust

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cep.2019.107607

关键词

Pseudo first order kinetics; Activation energy; Arrhenius constant; Delignification rate constant; Potential degree of delignification

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India [DST/INT/Nor/RCN/P-06/2015]
  2. Research Council of Norway (RCN) [246821/E20]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Delignification of lignocellulosic biomass by alkaline peroxide pre-treatment is a preliminary important step for an overall biomass fractionation process. In the present work, saw dusts are pre-treated by aqueous alkaline peroxide solution under different temperatures over a predetermined time. It is seen that Combined Pre-treatment (CP) removes a substantially higher quantity of lignin from biomass under a particular temperature. At elevated temperatures, the extent of delignification is observed much better. The % removal is: [PR: 19.35%(30 degrees C):25.26%(50 degrees C):33.30%(100 degrees C)]; [CD:14.64%(30 degrees C):23.64%(50 degrees C): 28.83%(100 degrees C)]. Batch kinetics is investigated with certain models and corresponding parameters are estimated. As pre-treatment severity is strongly correlated to the pre-treatment temperature, increased value of potential degree of delignification is observed at escalated temperatures. Kinetics of enzymatic hydrolysis of delignified biomass shows decreased product inhibition with increased substrate concentration under a particular enzyme loading. Starting with a combination of 50 g/L substrate concentration with an enzyme loading of 13.23 g/L, an optimum concentration of 17.2 g/L and 21.19 g/L of glucose are produced from Pinus roxburghii and Cedrus deodara respectively. Experimental data fit quite well with the competitive inhibition kinetics based theoretical models with r(2) >= 0.95. It is inferred that enzymes are competitively inhibited by glucose.

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