|
|
|
|
LEADER |
03559nam a2200673Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.1186-s13068-021-01875-4 |
008 |
220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 17546834 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Valorization of outer tunic of the marine filter feeder Ciona intestinalis towards the production of second-generation biofuel and prebiotic oligosaccharides
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b BioMed Central Ltd
|c 2021
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-021-01875-4
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Background: One of the sustainable development goals focuses on the biomass-based production as a replacement for fossil-based commodities. A novel feedstock with vast potentials is tunicate biomass, which can be pretreated and fermented in a similar way to lignocellulose. Ciona intestinalis is a marine filter feeder that is cultivated to produce fish feed. While the inner tissue body is used for feed production, the surrounding tunic remains as a cellulose-rich by-product, which can be further separated into outer and inner tunic. Ethanol production from organosolv-pretreated whole-tunic biomass was recently validated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the potential of organosolv pretreated outer-tunic biomass for the production of biofuels and cellobiose that is a disaccharide with prebiotic potential. Results: As a result, 41.4 g/L of ethanol by Saccharomyces cerevisiae, corresponding to a 90.2% theoretical yield, was achieved under the optimal conditions when the tunicate biomass was pretreated at 195 °C for 60 min at a liquid-to-solid ratio of 50. In addition, cellobiose production by enzymatic hydrolysis of the pretreated tunicate biomass was demonstrated with a maximum conversion yield of 49.7 wt. %. Conclusions: The utilisation of tunicate biomass offers an eco-friendly and sustainable alternative for value-added biofuels and chemicals. The cultivation of tunicate biomass in shallow coastal sea improves the quality of the water and ensures sustainable production of fish feed. Moreover, there is no competition for arable land, which leaves the latter available for food and feed production. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Bioethanol
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Bioethanol
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a biofuel
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a biomass
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Biomass
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Biomass
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Cellobiose
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Cellobiose
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a cellulose
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Cellulose
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Cellulose
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ciona intestinalis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ciona intestinalis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Conversion yield
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Enzymatic hydrolysis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a enzyme
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Enzymolysis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a ethanol
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ethanol
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ethanol
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ethanol production
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Feeds
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a filter feeder
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Filter feeders
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Filters
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Fish
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a hydrolysis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Liquid to solid ratio
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Optimal conditions
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a polysaccharide
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Prebiotics
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Production
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Saccharomyces cerevisiae
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Second generation
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Sustainable development
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Sustainable production
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Theoretical yield
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Tunicate
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a valorization
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Yeast
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Christakopoulos, P.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Hrůzová, K.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Karnaouri, A.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Matsakas, L.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Norén, F.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Rova, U.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Biotechnology for Biofuels
|