4.6 Article

Pretreatment Affects Profits From Xylanase During Enzymatic Saccharification of Corn Stover Through Changing the Interaction Between Lignin and Xylanase Protein

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.754593

关键词

pretreatment; enzymatic hydrolysis; xylanase; lignin; adsorption

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that AS pretreatment enhanced the function of xylanase in enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover, compared to SE pretreatment. AS pretreatment can lower the binding strength between lignin and xylanase, increasing enzyme utilization efficiency.
Effective pretreatment is vital to improve the biomass conversion efficiency, which often requires the addition of xylanase as an accessory enzyme to enhance enzymatic saccharification of corn stover. In this study, we investigated the effect of two sophisticated pretreatment methods including ammonium sulfite (AS) and steam explosion (SE) on the xylanase profits involved in enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. We further explored the interactions between lignin and xylanase Xyn10A protein. Our results showed that the conversion rates of glucan and xylan in corn stover by AS pretreatment were higher by Xyn10A supplementation than that by SE pretreatment. Compared with the lignin from SE pretreated corn stover, the lignin from AS pretreated corn stover had a lower Xyn10A initial adsorption velocity (13.56 vs. 10.89 mg g(-1) min(-1)) and adsorption capacity (49.46 vs. 27.42 mg g(-1) of lignin) and weakened binding strength (310.6 vs. 215.9 L g(-1)). Our study demonstrated the low absolute zeta potential and strong hydrophilicity of the lignin may partly account for relative weak interaction between xylanase protein and lignin from AS pretreated corn stover. In conclusion, our results suggested that AS pretreatment weakened the inhibition of lignin to enzyme, promoted the enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover, and decreased the cost of enzyme in bioconversion.

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

4.6
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