The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Removal of Fermentation Inhibitors Formed during Pretreatment of Biomass by Polymeric Adsorbents
Abstract
The production of aldehydes that are microbial inhibitors may occur when hexoses and pentoses in an aqueous solution are exposed to temperatures above 150 °C under acidic conditions common to acid-catalyzed lignocellulose biomass pretreatment. Concentrations greater than 0.1% of the degradation product, furfural, strongly inhibit fermentation, as was confirmed for hydrolysate that contained 0.5% (w/o) furfural. Methods of furfural removal that have been reported include sulfite or alkali addition to achieve chemical reduction, ion exchange, hydrophobic adsorption, and irreversible adsorption on activated carbon. This paper reports the removal of furfural from biomass hydrolysate by a polymeric adsorbent, XAD-4, and desorption of the furfural to regenerate the adsorbent using ethanol. Liquid chromatographic analysis showed that furfural concentrations were less than 0.01 g/L compared to the initial concentrations that were in the range of 1−5 g/L. Fermentation of the resulting biomass hydrolysate with recombinant Escherichia coli ethanologenic strain K011 confirmed that the concentration of furfural in the hydrolysate caused negligible inhibition. Fermentation of XAD-4-treated hydrolysate with E. coli K011 was nearly as rapid as the control medium that was formulated with reagent-grade sugars of the same concentration. Ethanol yields for both fermentations were 90% of theoretical. Modeling of the adsorptive properties of this styrene-based adsorbent indicates that it is suitable for on−off chromatography and could be useful in a continuous processing system for removing small amounts of aldehydes that might otherwise inhibit fermentation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks
Sánchez, Ó. J., & Cardona, C. A. (2008) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2007.11.013 · Cited by 1,826
An overview of second generation biofuel technologies
Sims, R. E. H., Mabee, W., Saddler, J. N., & Taylor, M. (2010) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.046 · Cited by 1,497
Review of Second-Generation Bioethanol Production from Residual Biomass
Lodz University of Technology, F. O. B. A. F. S., Robak, K., Balcerek, M., & Lodz University of Technology, F. O. B. A. F. S. (2018) · Food Technology and Biotechnology · doi:10.17113/ftb.56.02.18.5428 · Cited by 649
Pan, X., Arato, C., Gilkes, N., Gregg, D., Mabee, W., Pye, K., Xiao, Z., Zhang, X., & Saddler, J. (2005) · Biotechnology and Bioengineering · doi:10.1002/bit.20453 · Cited by 566
Ezeji, T., Qureshi, N., & Blaschek, H. P. (2007) · Biotechnology and Bioengineering · doi:10.1002/bit.21373 · Cited by 554
Recovery, concentration and purification of phenolic compounds by adsorption: A review
Soto, M. L., Moure, A., Domínguez, H., & Parajó, J. C. (2011) · Journal of Food Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2011.02.010 · Cited by 494
Schwartz, T. J., O’Neill, B. J., Shanks, B. H., & Dumesic, J. A. (2014) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/cs500364y · Cited by 175
Engel, P., Mladenov, R., Wulfhorst, H., Jäger, G., & Spiess, A. C. (2010) · Green Chemistry · doi:10.1039/c0gc00135j · Cited by 137
Recent Developments in Lignocellulosic Biofuels, a Renewable Source of Bioenergy
Rai, A. K., Al Makishah, N. H., Wen, Z., Gupta, G., Pandit, S., & Prasad, R. (2022) · Fermentation · doi:10.3390/fermentation8040161 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Weil, J. R., Dien, B., Bothast, R., Hendrickson, R., Mosier, N. S., & Ladisch, M. R.
- Venue
- Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2002-10-26
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 6132-6138
- ISSN
- 0888-5885 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5045
- OpenAlex
- W2034704042
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.