Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
7065092 | Biomass and Bioenergy | 2013 | 10 Pages |
Abstract
A study was conducted to optimize sugar production from oil palm empty fruit bunch fiber (EFBF). Three different pretreatments were applied to EFBF, namely steam, steam with 5% sodium hydroxide (steam + 5% NaOH) and steam with 5% acetic acid (steam + 5% acetic acid). The hydrolyzability of the pretreated EFBF was determined using cellulolytic enzyme mixture comprising of Celluclast 1.5L (C), Viscozyme L (V) and Novozyme 188 (N). The different pretreatments showed varying degree of severities to the morphology of the fiber. Steam + 5% acetic acid pretreatment was found to cause the most severe changes to the EFBF surface. The optimum combinations of the enzymes for EFBF degradation, using a fixed parameters, were determined using Simplex Lattice mixture design. For untreated, steam pretreated, steam + 5% NaOH, steam + 5% acetic acid EFBFs, the optimum combinations enzyme were 0.49C: 0.45V: 0.06N, 0.88C: 0.12N, 0.78C: 0.03V: 0.2N and 0.90C: 0.03V: 0.07N respectively. Surface morphology of EFBF appears to be the major contributing factor that affects efficiency of enzymatic hydrolysis. Among these four samples, steam + 5% acetic acid pretreated EFBF gave the highest yield of sugars (44.36% xylose; 52.03% glucose). Applying the best enzymatic combinations, saccharification of pretreated samples was optimized using RSM. saccharification of the steam + 5% acetic acid pretreated EFBF was able to yield 99.90 ± 10.92 mg gâ1 xylose and 281.77 ± 28.00 mg gâ1 glucose at 2.51% enzyme loading (with total protein loading 22.1 mg per gram EFBF) in 4.55% EFBF for 35.08 h of reaction. Overall, through the combination of steam + 5% acetic acid pretreatment, enzyme mixture optimization and optimization of enzymatic saccharification, EFBF has the potential to produce substantial amount of sugars (62.36% xylose; 81.84% glucose).
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Process Chemistry and Technology
Authors
Osman Hassan, Tang Pei Ling, Mohammad Yusof Maskat, Rosli Md. Illias, Khairiah Badri, Jamaliah Jahim, Nor Muhammad Mahadi,