4.2 Article

Digestibility of Bacillus firmus K-1 pretreated rice straw by different commercial cellulase cocktails

期刊

PREPARATIVE BIOCHEMISTRY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 52, 期 5, 页码 508-513

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10826068.2021.1969575

关键词

Glucose; lignocellulose; porosity; rice straw; xylanase; xylanolytic bacterium

资金

  1. King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT) through the KMUTT 55th Anniversary Commemorative Fund
  2. Energy Policy and Planning Office, Ministry of Energy, Thailand, through the Energy Conservation Promotion Fund (ENCON Fund)
  3. KMUTT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study introduces an eco-friendly method of removing xylan from rice straw using xylanolytic Bacillus firmus K-1, showing that smaller particle sizes of rice straw give similar xylan removal efficiency. The pretreated rice straw exhibited higher digestibility and greater glucan conversion under enzymatic hydrolysis, with the extent of cellulose hydrolysis depending on the types and formulations of enzymes.
Removal of xylan in plant biomass is believed to increase cellulose hydrolysis by uncovering cellulose surfaces for cellulase adsorption and, in turn, catalysis reaction. Herein, we describe an eco-friendly method by culturing a xylanolytic Bacillus firmus K-1 on rice straw to remove xylan. The bacterium was grown on 2.5% (w/v) rice straw with different biomass particle sizes for two days at 37 degrees C. We found that the particle sizes ranged from <1 to 5 mm gave a similar xylan removal degree (about 21%). Besides, the porosity and disintegration of the rice straw fibers were observed at the molecular level. The digestibility of pretreated rice straw was tested with different commercial cellulase cocktails. We found that the pretreated rice straw was more susceptible to enzymatic hydrolysis, giving 30-70% glucan conversion than the untreated one. The degree of cellulose hydrolysis depended strongly on the kinds of enzyme and their formulations.

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

4.2
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