Impact of mixed feedstock of wheat straw, willow and Miscanthus on enzymatic hydrolysis and inhibitor production after microwave hydrothermal pre-treatment in Europe

References

• Yue D, You F, Snyder SW. Biomass-to-bioenergy and biofuel supply chain optimization: overview, key issues and challenges. Comput Chem Eng. 2014;66:36–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balat M. Production of bioethanol from lignocellulosic materials via the biochemical pathway: a review. Energy Convers Manage. 2011;52(2):858–875.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko JK, Um Y, Park Y, et al. Compounds inhibiting the bioconversion of hydrothermally pretreated lignocellulose. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015;99(10):4201–4212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucharska K, Rybarczyk P, Hołowacz I, et al. Pretreatment of lignocellulosic materials as substrates for fermentation processes. Molecules. 2018;23(11):2937.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiaramonti D, Prussi M, Ferrero S, et al. Review of pretreatment processes for lignocellulosic ethanol production, and development of an innovative method. Biomass Bioenergy. 2012;46:25–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim Y, Kreke T, Ko JK, et al. Hydrolysis-determining substrate characteristics in liquid hot water pretreated hardwood. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2015;112(4):677–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pu Y, Hu F, Huang F, et al. Assessing the molecular structure basis for biomass recalcitrance during dilute acid and hydrothermal pretreatments. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2013;6(1):15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gurram RN, Datta S, Lin YJ, et al. Removal of enzymatic and fermentation inhibitory compounds from biomass slurries for enhanced biorefinery process efficiencies. Bioresour Technol. 2011;102(17):7850–7859.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmqvist E, Hähn-Hägerdal B. Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. Bioresour Technol. 2000;74(1):25–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galbe M, Wallberg O. Pretreatment for biorefineries: a review of common methods for efficient utilisation of lignocellulosic materials. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2019;12(1):1–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almeida JRM, Bertilsson M, Gorwa-Grauslund MF, et al. Metabolic effects of furaldehydes and impacts on biotechnological processes. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;82(4):625–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guarnieri MT, Franden MA, Johnson CW, et al. Conversion and assimilation of furfural and 5-(hydroxymethyl)furfural by Pseudomonas putida KT2440. Metab Eng Commun. 2017;4:22–28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Almeida JR, Modig T, Petersson A, et al. Increased tolerance and conversion of inhibitors in lignocellulosic hydrolysates by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2007;82(4):340–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanchez B, Bautista J. Effects of furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural on the fermentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and biomass production from Candida guilliermondii. Enzyme Microb Technol. 1988;10(5):315–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taherzadeh MJ, Gustafsson L, Niklasson C, et al. Physiological effects of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural on Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2000;53(6):701–708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu ZL, Slininger PJ, Dien BS, et al. Adaptive response of yeasts to furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and new chemical evidence for HMF conversion to 2,5-bis-hydroxymethylfuran. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2004;31(8):345–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu ZL, Slininger PJ, Gorsich SW. Enhanced biotransformation of furfural and hydroxymethylfurfural by newly developed ethanologenic yeast strains. In: Davison BH, Evans BR, Finkelstein M, McMillan JD, editors. Twenty-sixth symposium on biotechnology for fuels and chemicals. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 2005. p. 451–460.
   Google Scholar
• Oke MA, Annuar MSM, Simarani K. Mixed feedstock approach to lignocellulosic ethanol production—prospects and limitations. Bioenerg Res. 2016;9(4):1189–1203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Althuri A, Gujjala LKS, Banerjee R. Partially consolidated bioprocessing of mixed lignocellulosic feedstocks for ethanol production. Bioresour Technol. 2017;245(Pt A):530–539.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Michelin M, Teixeira JA. Liquid hot water pretreatment of multi feedstocks and enzymatic hydrolysis of solids obtained thereof. Bioresour Technol. 2016;216:862–869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashraf MT, Schmidt JE. Process simulation and economic assessment of hydrothermal pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of multi-feedstock lignocellulose - Separate vs combined processing. Bioresour Technol. 2018;249:835–843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun N, Xu F, Sathitsuksanoh N, et al. Blending municipal solid waste with corn stover for sugar production using ionic liquid process. Bioresour Technol. 2015;186(C):200–206.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Silva-Fernandes T, Duarte LC, Carvalheiro F, et al. Hydrothermal pretreatment of several lignocellulosic mixtures containing wheat straw and two hardwood residues available in Southern Europe. Bioresour Technol. 2015;183(C):213–220.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brodeur-Campbell M, Klinger J, Shonnard D. Feedstock mixture effects on sugar monomer recovery following dilute acid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis. Bioresour Technol. 2012;116(C):320–326.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shi J, Thompson VS, Yancey NA, et al. Impact of mixed feedstocks and feedstock densification on ionic liquid pretreatment efficiency. Biofuels. 2013;4(1):63–72.
   Google Scholar
• Baral NR, Davis R, Bradley TH. Supply and value chain analysis of mixed biomass feedstock supply system for lignocellulosic sugar production. Biofuels, Bioprod Bioref. 2019;13(3):635–659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvira P, Negro MJ, Ballesteros I, et al. Steam explosion for wheat straw pretreatment for sugars production. Bioethanol. 2016;2(1):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Di Maio D, Turley D. 2014. Lignocellulosic feedstock in the UK. York, UK: NNFC The Bioeconomy Consultants; p. 1–45. https://www.nnfcc.co.uk/files/mydocs/LBNet%20Lignocellulosic%20feedstockin%20the%20UK_Nov%202014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski I, Clifton-Brown JC, Scurlock JMO, et al. Miscanthus: European experience with a novel energy crop. Biomass Bioenergy. 2000;19(4):209–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volk TA, Abrahamson LP, Cameron KD, et al. Yields of willow biomass crops across a range of sites in North America. Asp Appl Biol. 2011;112:67–74.
   Google Scholar
• Saeman JF, Bubl JL, Harris EE. Quantitative saccharification of wood and cellulose. Ind Eng Chem Anal Ed. 1945;17(1):35–37.
   Google Scholar
• Overend RP, Chornet E. Fractionation of lignocellulosics by steam-aqueous pretreatments [and discussion]. Philos Trans R Soc. 1987;321(1561):523–563.
   Google Scholar
• Selig M, Weiss N, & Ji Y. Enzymatic saccharification of lignocellulosic biomass: laboratory analytical procedure (LAP). Colorado, USA: NREL - National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2008. p. 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Ibbett R, Gaddipati S, Hill S, et al. Structural reorganisation of cellulose fibrils in hydrothermally deconstructed lignocellulosic biomass and relationships with enzyme digestibility. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2013;6(1):33.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greetham D, Wimalasena T, Kerruish DWM, et al. Development of a phenotypic assay for characterisation of ethanologenic yeast strain sensitivity to inhibitors released from lignocellulosic feedstocks. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2014;41(6):931–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson S, Smart KA, Cook DJ. Optimisation of alkaline reagent based chemical pre-treatment of Brewers spent grains for bioethanol production. Ind Crops Prod. 2014;62:219–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll JP, Finnan J. The relationship between bulk density and energy input, in biomass pellet production. Adv Anim Biosci. 2010;1(1):331–331.
   Google Scholar
• Allen SA, Clark W, McCaffery JM, et al. Furfural induces reactive oxygen species accumulation and cellular damage in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2010;3(1):2–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greetham D, Hart AJ, Tucker GA. Presence of low concentrations of acetic acid improves yeast tolerance to hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) and furfural. Biomass Bioenergy. 2016;85(C):53–60.
   Google Scholar
• Mosier N, Hendrickson R, Ho N, et al. Optimization of pH controlled liquid hot water pretreatment of corn stover. Bioresour Technol. 2005;96(18):1986–1993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar