4.4 Article

Production of ethanol from thin stillage by metabolically engineered Escherichia coli

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY LETTERS
卷 32, 期 3, 页码 405-411

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10529-009-0159-2

关键词

Biofuels; Metabolic engineering; Glycerol fermentation; Escherichia coli; Thin stillage; Ethanol

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET-0645188]
  2. Div Of Engineering Education and Centers
  3. Directorate For Engineering [813570] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thin stillage is a by-product generated in large amounts during the production of ethanol that is rich in carbon sources like glycerol, glucose and maltose. Unfortunately, the fermentation of thin stillage results in a mixture of organic acids and ethanol and minimum utilization of glycerol, the latter a compound that can represent up to 80% of the available substrates in this stream. We report here the efficient production of ethanol from thin stillage by a metabolically engineered strain of Escherichia coli. Simultaneous utilization of glycerol and sugars was achieved by overexpressing either the fermentative or the respiratory glycerol-utilization pathway. However, amplification of the fermentative pathway (encoded by gldA and dhaKLM) led to more efficient consumption of glycerol and promoted the synthesis of reduced products, including ethanol. A previously constructed strain, EH05, containing mutations that prevented the accumulation of competing by-products (i.e. lactate, acetate, and succinate) and overexpressing the fermentative pathway for glycerol utilization [i.e. strain EH05 (pZSKLMgldA)], efficiently converted thin stillage supplemented with only mineral salts to ethanol at yields close to 85% of the theoretical maximum. Ethanol accounted for about 90% (w/w) of the product mixture. These results, along with the comparable performance of strain EH05 (pZSKLMgldA) in 0.5 and 5 l fermenters, indicate a great potential for the adoption of this process by the biofuels industry.

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

4.4
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