4.7 Article

Biological hydrogen production of the genus Clostridium:: Metabolic study and mathematical model simulation

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 32, 期 12, 页码 1728-1735

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.12.009

关键词

biological hydrogen production; Clostridium acetobutylicum; C. butyricum; C. tyrobutyricum; C. beijerinckii; kinetic model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The biochemical hydrogen potential (BHP) tests were conducted to investigate the metabolism of glucose fermentation and hydrogen production performance of four Clostridial species, including C. acetobutylicum M121, C butyricum ATCC19398, C tyrobutyricum FYa102, and C. beijerinckii L9. Batch experiments showed that all the tested strains fermented glucose, reduced medium pH from 7.2 to a value between 4.6 and 5.0, and produced butyrate (0.37-0.67 mmol/mmol-glucose) and acetate (0.34-0.42 mmol/mmol-glucose) as primary soluble metabolites. Meanwhile, a significant amount of hydrogen gas was produced accompanied with glucose degradation and acid production. Among the strains examined, C. beijerinckii L9 had the highest hydrogen production yield of 2.81 mmol/mmol-glucose. A kinetic model was developed to evaluate the metabolism of glucose fermentation of those Clostridium species in the batch cultures. The model, in general, was able to accurately describe the profile of glucose degradation as well as production of biomass, butyrate, acetate, ethanol, and hydrogen observed in the batch tests. In the glucose re-feeding experiments, the C tyrobutyricum FYa102 and C. beijerinckii L9 isolates fermented additional glucose during re-feeding tests, producing a substantial amount of hydrogen. In contrast, C. butyricum ATCC19398 was unable to produce more hydrogen despite additional supply of glucose, presumably due to the metabolic shift from acetate/butyrate to lactate/ethanol production. (C) 2007 International Association for Hydrogen Energy. Published by 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