4.8 Article

Lignin fate and characterization during ionic liquid biomass pretreatment for renewable chemicals and fuels production

期刊

GREEN CHEMISTRY
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 1236-1247

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3gc42295j

关键词

-

资金

  1. Total
  2. Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, of the U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fate of lignin from wheat straw, Miscanthus, and Loblolly pine after pretreatment by a non-toxic and recyclable ionic liquid (IL), [C(2)mim][OAc], followed by enzymatic hydrolysis was investigated. The lignin partitioned into six process streams, each of which was quantified and analyzed by a combination of a novel solution-state two-dimensional (2D) nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) method, and size exclusion chromatography (SEC). Pretreatment of biomass samples by [C(2)mim][OAc] at 120 and 160 degrees C enhances hydrolysis rates and enzymatic glucan digestions compared to those of untreated biomass samples. Lignin partitioning into the different streams can be controlled by altering the ionic liquid pre-treatment conditions, with higher temperatures favoring higher lignin partitioning to the IL stream. 2D NMR bond abundance data and SEC results reveal that lignin is depolymerized during ionic liquid pretreatment, and lignin of different molecular masses can be isolated in the different process streams. SEC suggested that higher molecular mass lignin was precipitated from the ionic liquid, leaving smaller molecular mass lignin in solution for further extraction. Lignin obtained as a residue of enzymatic hydrolysis contained the highest molecular mass molecules, similar in structure to the control lignin. The results suggest that isolated lignins via IL pretreatment from all three feedstocks were both depolymerized and did not contain new condensed structures. This finding leads to the possibility that lignin obtained from this IL pretreatment process may be more amenable to upgrading, thereby enhancing biorefinery economics.

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

4.8
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