Accepted Manuscript Improvement of butanol production from a hardwood hemicelluloses hydrolysate by combined sugar concentration and phenols removal Fatma Mechmech, Hassan Chadjaa, Mohamed Rahni, Mariya Marinova, Najla Ben Akacha, Mohamed Gargouri PII: DOI: Reference:

S0960-8524(15)00676-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.05.012 BITE 14983

To appear in:

Bioresource Technology

Received Date: Revised Date: Accepted Date:

19 March 2015 6 May 2015 7 May 2015

Please cite this article as: Mechmech, F., Chadjaa, H., Rahni, M., Marinova, M., Akacha, N.B., Gargouri, M., Improvement of butanol production from a hardwood hemicelluloses hydrolysate by combined sugar concentration and phenols removal, Bioresource Technology (2015), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.05.012

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

1

Improvement of butanol production from a hardwood

2

hemicelluloses hydrolysate by combined sugar

3

concentration and phenols removal

4

Fatma Mechmecha,c, , Hassan Chadjaab, Mohamed Rahnib, ,

5

Mariya Marinovac* ,Najla Ben Akachad and Mohamed Gargouria

6

a

7

Technology, National Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology (INSAT) Tunis,

8

University of Carthage, Tunisia

9

b

Biocatalysis and Industrial Enzymes Group, Laboratory of Microbial Ecology and

Centre National en Electrochimie et en Technologies Environnementales, Shawinigan,

10

QC, Canada

11

c

12

Biorefinery, Department of Chemical Engineering, Polytechnique Montréal, Montréal, QC,

13

Canada

14

d

15

Chemical Analysis (INRAP), Biotechno pole Sidi Thabet, Ariana, Tunisia

Research Unit on Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Development of the Forest

Laboratory of Natural Substances, National Institute of Research and Physical and

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

* Corresponding author: [email protected]; fax: +1 514 340 4159

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

23

Abstract

24

The feasibility of using hardwood hemicellulosic pre-hydrolysate recovered from a

25

dissolving pulping process for Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol (ABE) fermentation has been

26

investigated. Dilutions and detoxification methods based on flocculation and nanofiltration

27

were tested to determine the inhibitory concentration of phenolic compounds and to

28

evaluate the efficiency of inhibitors removal on fermentation. Flocculation carried out with

29

ferric sulfate was the most effective method for removal of phenolics (56%) and acetic acid

30

(80%). The impact on fermentation was significant, with an ABE production of 6.40 g/L

31

and 4.25 g/L when using flocculation or combined nanofiltration/flocculation respectively,

32

as compared to a non-significant production for the untreated hydrolysate. By decreasing

33

the toxicity effect of inhibitors, this study reports for the first time that the use of these

34

techniques is efficient to increase the inhibitory concentration threshold of phenols, from

35

0.3 g/L in untreated hydrolysate, to 1.1 g/L in flocculated and in nanofiltrated and

36

flocculated hydrolysates.

37

Highlights:

38



39

Hardwood pre-hydrolysates from dissolving pulp mill were used for ABE fermentation.

40



Flocculation was the most efficient method for inhibitors removal.

41



Detoxification increased the phenolics inhibitory level on ABE production up to 1.1

42

g/L.

43

Key words: Bio-butanol; flocculation; nanofiltration; phenolics; wood biomass

44

hydrolysate

45 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

46 47

1. Introduction During the last decades, the growing environmental and economic concerns have

48

stimulated a worldwide adoption of new government policies and directives for the

49

production of renewable, biomass-derived fuels (Qureshi et al., 2013; Stoklosa & Hodge,

50

2014). Bio-butanol, a product of the ABE (Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol) fermentation, has

51

recently emerged as a superior biofuel and is considered as an attractive alternative to

52

conventional jet fuels, which may be an important factor in the success of the biofuel

53

industry. Its properties are similar to those of the conventional gasoline (Baral & Shah,

54

2014) and it has several advantages over ethanol: higher energy content, lower volatility,

55

less hydroscopic and less corrosive (Lee et al., 2008). Most important from an economic

56

perspective is the fact that its biological production by Clostridia species is largely

57

influenced by the price of the fermentation substrate (Green, 2011). For these reasons, the

58

use of lignocellulosic biomass, such as wood chips or wood wastes, as a feedstock to

59

produce bio-butanol has prompted the interest of the research community. Governments in

60

countries with a mature forestry sector, such as Canada and the Scandinavian countries,

61

have promoted the development and the implementation of the forest biorefinery and its

62

integration into existing pulp and paper (P&P) facilities, the largest global consumers of

63

woody biomass. The P&P industry in these countries has been facing for some time a

64

difficult economic situation (Marinova et al., 2009) and the concept of the integrated forest

65

biorefinery (IFBR) has been identified as a means to diversify its products portfolio,

66

increase its revenues, and regain profitability by manufacturing of a new value-added

67

bioproducts (Adriaan van et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2010). In a Kraft dissolving pulp

68

process, the hemicelluloses are extracted from wood chips prior to the pulping step by

69

steam or hot water partial hydrolysis. This hemicelluloses stream can be used as a

70

feedstock to an adjunct biorefinery plant, to be converted by hydrolysis into C5 and C6 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

71

sugars, which will in turn be transformed into biofuels and bioproducts such as ethanol,

72

butanol or furfural (Marinova et al., 2014). However, the hemicelluloses pre-hydrolysate

73

contains other wood components besides the sugar oligomers, which are potential

74

fermentation inhibitors; those compounds are: acetic acid, furfural, hydroxymethylfurfural

75

and phenolic derivatives. Detoxification methods of the pre-hydrolysate solution prior to

76

ABE fermentation have been investigated by several authors; they include activated carbon

77

(Kudahettige-Nilsson et al., 2015) and alkaline peroxide treatment (Wang & Chen, 2011).

78

The removal of lignin degradation products by flocculation with primary focus on phenolic

79

compounds has also received much interest from the scientific community. It is known that

80

some phenolics found in lingocellulosic hydrolysates are colloidal particles with high

81

anionic charge that cannot be sedimented easily. During flocculation phenomena, a two-

82

step mechanism occurs. First, the flocculating agents or polyelectrolytes characterized by

83

an ionic charge form bridges between the colloidal particles. These linked particles in turn

84

form, through a mechanism of charge neutralization, agglomerates or patches which can be

85

removed from the solution more easily (Burke et al., 2011; Yasarla & Ramarao, 2012;

86

Yasarla & Ramarao, 2013). It has been reported that this method is effective for inhibitors

87

removal (Ajao et al., 2015b; Duarte et al., 2010) but to the best of our knowledge no

88

fermentation results on the flocculated material have yet been published. It is speculated

89

that the fermentation yield of butanol can be enhanced when combining the detoxification

90

step with the sugar concentration step by evaporation or membrane separation.

91

Nanofiltration may be a feasible membrane concentration technique for the recovery of

92

hemicelluloses from hydrolysates thanks to its selectivity and low energy requirement

93

(Huang et al., 2008; Wei et al., 2014). Ajao et al. (2015a) proposed recently a new process

94

configuration for the detoxification and concentration of a pre-hydrolysate from a

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

95

dissolving pulp mill by combining nanofiltration and flocculation in a single step, prior to

96

the production of ethanol by fermentation.

97

The work presented herein extends the scope of this prior work and investigates the

98

applicability of flocculation or combined flocculation/nanofiltration to enhance the ABE

99

fermentation. Specifically, the objectives of this work were to:

100



Establish the feasibility of using an untreated or detoxified hemicellulosic wood

101

hydrolysate from a Kraft dissolving pulp mill as a carbon source for the ABE

102

fermentation by Clostridium acetobutylicum;

103



Demonstrate the impact of the proposed detoxification methods on the butanol

104

production (flocculation was first applied alone and later combined to nanofiltration for

105

inhibitors removal);

106 107



Determine the inhibitory concentration of phenolic compounds in each hydrolysate by comparing ABE production, fermentation yields and productivities.

108 109

2. Materials and methods

110

2.1. Microorganism, culture maintenance and inoculum preparation

111

Clostridium acetobutylicum ATCC 824 was obtained from American Type Culture

112

Collection (ATCC) and was cultured in sterilized RCM (Reinforced Clostridium Medium)

113

under anaerobic conditions at 37°C for 18-20 hours until an Optical Density (OD600) of

114

1.9-2. A stock culture was then prepared in 30% glycerol and stored at 80°C. For inoculum

115

preparation, RCM medium consisting of (in g/L): tryptose 10, beef extract 10, glucose 5,

116

sodium chloride 5, yeast extract 3, sodium acetate 1, soluble starch 0.5 and L-cysteine-HCl

117

0.5 was used. The medium was purged with a gas mixture (80% N2 and 20% CO2) to

118

dissolve oxygen and then autoclaved at 121°C for 15 minutes. The culture (inoculums) was

119

inoculated with stock culture and allowed to grow for 16-18 hours at 37°C under shaking 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

120

conditions at 110 rpm, until it was ready to be inoculated into the butanol production

121

medium at an OD600 between 0.6 and 0.9.

122 123 124

2.2. Preparation and treatment of hydrolysates Before testing the fermentability of the wood hydrolysate, different detoxification

125

approaches were evaluated (Figure 1).

126

2.2.1. Pre-hydrolysis: steam and hot water

127

A mixture of aspen (60%) and maple (40%) wood furnish obtained from an operating

128

Kraft pulping mill located in eastern Canada was used in this study. The pre-

129

hydrolysate rich in hemicelluloses was generated in a pilot digester at the FPInnovations

130

facilities (Pointe-Claire, Canada) using steam and hot water, whereas the cellulosic fraction

131

was directed to dissolving pulp production as described previously by Ajao et al. (2015b).

132

A 12L sample of pre-hydrolysate was withdrawn and shipped to the Centre National en

133

Electrochimie et en Technologies Environnementales (CNETE), where the experimental

134

program was conducted.

135

2.2.2. Sulfuric acid hydrolysis

136

To convert the polysaccharides into fermentable monomeric sugars, the pre-

137

hydrolysate was completely hydrolyzed with 1.5% wt/wt sulfuric acid at 121°C for 60 min.

138

The hydrolysate was filtered and sterilized by passing through a 1.5 µm filter. Untreated

139

and treated hydrolysates were neutralized with Ca(OH)2, from an initial pH of 1.34 to a

140

final pH of 6.5.

141

2.2.3. Hydrolysate detoxification

142

The procedure developed by Ajao et al. (2015a) in a previous work on the

143

production of ethanol from a similar hemicellulosic pre-hydrolysate extracted from wood

144

chips, was used for the hydrolysate detoxification in the current work. 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

145

Coagulation-Flocculation. Flocculation experiments were carried out in jar tests using

146

ferric sulfate Fe2(SO4)3 as flocculating agent. A volume of 1 L of a wood hydrolysate was

147

mixed with a 200 g/L of ferric sulfate solution to reach a ratio [Fe]/[phenols] of 1 and the

148

mixture was homogenized by agitation at 150 rpm. The pH was then adjusted to 6.8 with

149

Ca(OH)2 and the agitation was resumed for 30 min at 50 rpm. At the end of the agitation

150

period, the mixture was left to rest for 2 hours so that a sedimentation occurs. The

151

supernatant was then filtered with a 1.5 µm filter and used as a carbon source to carry out

152

the fermentation studies.

153

Concentration of hydrolysate by nanomembrane filtration. The pre-hydrolysate,

154

containing polysaccharides, was concentrated by naonomembrane filtration using the

155

organic membrane NF270 (MWCO 200-400 Da). A laboratory scale cross-flow flat-sheet

156

membrane test unit (SEPA CF II, GE Osmonics) was used in a batch mode and the

157

permeate stream collected in a small vessel. During the concentration experiments, 2.35 L

158

of permeate were withdrawn from an initial volume of 3.50 L of pre-hydrolysate to reach a

159

volumetric concentration factor of 3.43. Before and after concentration, samples from the

160

feed tank were taken in order to analyze the amounts of sugars, total phenols, acetic acid,

161

furfural and HMF.

162 163

2.3. Fermentation medium and conditions

164

The fermentations experiments were carried out in 250 mL screw capped Schott

165

bottles with 200 mL of fermentation medium (xylose 60 g/L and yeast extract 5g/L) (Choi

166

et al., 2012; Qureshi & Blaschek, 1999). Untreated or flocculated hydrolysates containing

167

inhibitory chemicals were used as carbon sources. The phenolic compounds concentrations

168

of the hydrolysates were first adjusted to stepwise decreasing levels by serial dilutions and

169

the final rate of sugars was raised to 60 g/L of xylose. A gas mixture consisting of 80% 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

170

N2and 20% CO2 was sparged for 5 min. through the samples to remove oxygen, before

171

they were sterilized at 121°C for 15 min. After cooling, loosely capped bottles were

172

transferred to anaerobic jars containing envelopes Gas Pak (BD Gas PakTMEZ Anaerobe

173

Container System) with indicators (BD BBLTM Dry Anaerobic Indicator Strips) for 48h to

174

create anaerobic conditions in the mixtures. Prior to inoculation, 2 mL of filtered sterilized

175

stock solution consisting of buffer (KH2PO4, 50 g/L; K2HPO4,50 g/L; ammonium acetate,

176

220 g/L), vitamins (para-aminobenzoic acid, 0.1 g/L; thiamin, 0.1 g/L; Biotin, 0.001 g/L)

177

and minerals (MgSO4.7H2O, 20 g/L; MnSO4.H2O, 1 g/L; FeSO4.7H2O, 1 g/L; NaCl, 1

178

g/L) were added to supply the equivalent nutriment concentration level as a synthetic

179

medium (Ezeji et al., 2007). Finally, 5% (v/v) of active growth inoculums was added and

180

the incubation was performed at 37°C under static conditions without pH control. Samples

181

were taken at regular intervals for optical density measurements. Sugars and ABE analysis

182

for all fermentation experiments were conducted at least in duplicates. During the course of

183

fermentation, 5 mL samples were periodically withdrawn to measure pH, OD600, residual

184

xylose, alcohols, acetic acid and butyric acid.

185 186

2.4. Analytical methods

187

Spectrophotometric analysis. The growth of C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 was monitored

188

by measuring OD600 using a UV-visible spectrophotometer (Pharmacia Biotech

189

Novaspec®II).Total phenols concentration was measured by an UV-visible colorimetric

190

method using Folin-Ciocalteu reagent method from Singleton and Rossi (1965).

191

GC analysis. Butanol, acetone and ethanol were measured by gas chromatography (GC

192

7890A, Agilent Technologies), equipped with a flame ionization detector (FID, H2 flow

193

rate: 30 mL/min; air flow rate: 2.23 mL/min) and an OV 624 capillary column.

194 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

195

HPLC Analyses.

196



The concentration of simple sugars was determined by high performance liquid

197

chromatography (HPLC) using an Agilent 1260 system, a Refractive Index Detector

198

and an EC Nucleodur RP-NH2 column (250 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 μm ). Samples separation

199

was performed at 40°C with a mixture of acetonitrile and deionized water (ratio 75:25)

200

as a mobile phase and at a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min.

201



ABE productivity was calculated as total ABE produced in g/L, divided by the

202

fermentation time and is expressed as g/L.h. The ABE yield was calculated as the total

203

ABE produced, divided by the total sugars used and is expressed as g/g.

204



HMF and furfural were also analyzed by HPLC (Agilent Technologies, Germany)

205

using a 280 nm diode array detector (DAD) and a Nucleosil C18 (150 x4.6 mm)

206

Column. The inhibitors were eluted with a mixture of acetonitrile, deionized water and

207

acetic acid (ratio 84:15:1) at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min.

208



Organic acids concentrations were determined using the same HPLC with a diode array

209

detector. Separation was carried out using Interstil ODS-3 column (150 x4.6 mm) at

210

40°C. The mobile phase was a mixture of 99% KH2PO4 at pH 2.8, 1% acetonitrile and

211

a flow rate of 1.25 mL/min.

212



Syringaldehyde, vanillin and gallic acid were analyzed by HPLC (Agilent

213

Technologies, Germany) using a Nucleosil C18 (150 x 4.6 mm) and a DAD at 313 nm

214

and 280 nm. The separation was achieved with a mixture of 15% acetonitrile – 85%

215

(0.1% phosphoric acid in water).

216 217 218 219 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

220

3. Results and discussion

221

3.1. Removal of phenolic compounds

222

During the lignocellulosic biomass pre-hydrolysis and hydrolysis, the conversion of

223

sugars from oligomeric to monomeric forms occurs together with the generation of

224

chemical compounds, including sugar and lignin degradation products having different

225

inhibitory activity levels (Baral & Shah, 2014; Ben Chaabane & Marchal, 2013). The

226

untreated hydrolysate used in this study contained 29.7 g/L of fermentable sugars, xylose

227

being the most abundant one (80% by weight of total sugars).The concentration of

228

potential fermentation inhibitors were: 10.7 g/L acetic acid, 3.8 g/L phenolic compounds,

229

0.1 g/L HMF and 0.18 g/L furfural. Additional parameters are given in Table 1. At these

230

levels, the inhibitory profile of the fermentation medium was critical and no growth of C.

231

acetobutylicum, nor butanol production was observed; results from this preliminary phase

232

of the work are not given herein. In order to decrease the inhibitory effect exerted by these

233

compounds, the hydrolysate was subjected to flocculation to remove the phenolics

234

produced by the degradation of lignin. Flocculation was achieved by addition of ferric

235

sulfate and the obtained results showed that this method was effective to remove 56.6% of

236

the phenolic compounds with a high sugar recovery (26.7 g/L). Those results also

237

demonstrate that flocculation does not remove significantly the fermentable sugars (Table

238

1). In fact, flocculation can preferentially precipitate out the colloidal fraction containing

239

lignin and lignin derived compounds (Duarte et al., 2010). The flocculation also caused the

240

removal of other inhibitors from the hydrolysate, 79.4% of acetic acid, 20% of HMF and

241

5.55% of furfural. Those results are in good agreement with the removal percentage found

242

by Ajao et al. (2015a). In addition, it can also be concluded that the removal of such

243

inhibitors, generally present in the solution, can be largely attributed to the use of lime for

244

pH adjustment as well as to the filtration (Table1). 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

245

The concentration of sugars obtained by pre-hydrolysis of wood chips is low and it is

246

not economically feasible to use this medium for microbial fermentation to produce high

247

value products (Qi et al., 2011). A second method combining concentration and

248

detoxification by nanofiltration was added to the procedure to increase the sugar

249

concentration. The acid hydrolysate thus produced was further detoxified by flocculation.

250

As shown in Table 2, when the NF270 membrane was used in the nanofiltration step,

251

phenols were the only inhibitors affected and their concentration ratio was increased by a

252

factor of 2.97, while it remained practically unchanged for acetic acid, furfural and HMF.

253

Qi et al. (2011) have also observed a negative retention of furfural when using NF270 to

254

concentrate a model solution of xylose, glucose and furfural. After flocculation, the

255

amount of acetic acid decreased by 77.7%, whereas the concentration of HMF and furfural

256

remained high. The detoxification strategy combining pre-hydrolysate concentration and

257

hydrolysate flocculation was effective in concentrating the sugars, but not in removing the

258

inhibitors.

259

As shown in Table 3, the dilution effect of various hydrolysates generated in the

260

course of the experimental program was investigated. It should be noted that these

261

dilutions were undertaken in order to determine the exact inhibitory concentration of the

262

total phenolic compounds in each hydrolysate and not as a detoxification method to be

263

considered at an industrial scale. This approach caused a reduction in sugar content that

264

may negatively affect the ABE production. Therefore, the hydrolysates were supplemented

265

with xylose prior to fermentation to raise the final sugar concentration to approximately 60

266

g/L, so that the inhibitors concentration remains the only parameter to be considered.

267 268 269 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

270 271

3.2. ABE fermentation of untreated hydrolysate In order to investigate the possible upgrade of the pre-hydrolysate obtained from a

272

Kraft dissolving pulp mill and to test its ability to be fermented by C. acetobutylicum for

273

ABE production, fermentation experiments were conducted using different hydrolysates,

274

as illustrated in Figure 1. A control experiment was first performed using 60 g/L of xylose

275

as model substrate and C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 to benchmark the fermentation tests.

276

As shown in Figure 2A, during the acidogenic phase of the Clostridium growth which

277

lasted 72h, acetic and butyric acids were produced by fermentation. The final

278

concentrations of those two acids reached 2.66 g/L and 1.40 g/L, respectively. During the

279

acidogenic phase, the pH decreased to 4.8, which is considered as an optimum value,

280

ensuring the transition from the acidogenic to the solvatogenic phase. The solvatogenic

281

phase resulted in the production of 5.82 g/L ABE with 3.95 g/L of butanol (Figure 2B),

282

corresponding to an ABE productivity of 0.04 g/L.h. After 144h of fermentation, 25.2 g/L

283

of xylose were consumed; the corresponding ABE yield was 0.23 g/g and the acetic acid

284

production 2.4 g/L (Figure 2A). The obtained kinetic parameters are higher than those

285

previously reported by Jiang et al. (2014) from a study in which xylose was used as a

286

carbon source to produce butanol by C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 under uncontrolled pH

287

conditions. The reported ABE productivity was 0.023 g/L.h and the yield 0.023 g/g.

288

Following the control experiment, fermentation was conducted using the untreated

289

wood hydrolysate as carbon source with different dilutions (Figure 3A). After 144h of

290

fermentation, an insignificant ABE production was observed at a phenolic concentration

291

higher than 0.3 g/L. This result may be linked to an accumulation of acetic acid of 10.1 g/L

292

which was not re-assimilated to produce solvents in the presence of 2.3 g/L of phenols. As

293

illustrated on Figure 3A, at phenolic concentrations of 0.17 g/L or 0.3 g/L, the total ABE

294

production was about 0.8 g/L with around 0.4 g/L of butanol. This production level is low 12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

295

compared to the level achieved in the control experiment where xylose was used as carbon

296

source, suggesting that the hydrolysate remains toxic for the culture even after a 13-fold

297

dilution. The inhibition effect can be primarily attributed to the presence of totally soluble

298

phenolics that have been reported to be more toxic than furfural and HMF, even at low

299

concentrations (Baral & Shah, 2014). These compounds are known to undergo partitioning

300

in the biological membranes, thus reducing their permeability and their ability to play the

301

role of selective barriers and enzyme matrices (Ibraheem & Ndimba, 2013; Palmqvist &

302

Hahn-Hägerdal, 2000). It has also been shown in previous studies that low concentrations

303

of HMF and furfural produce a synergetic effect on the ABE fermentation (Ezeji et al.,

304

2007; Qureshi et al., 2012; Zhang et al., 2012). This would support the assumption that in

305

our work HMF and furfural cannot be considered as inhibition factors.

306

In order to investigate the monomers inhibitory concentration, major phenolic

307

compounds contained in the untreated hydrolysate were analyzed. As shown in Table 4,

308

the amount of vanillin was about 0.042 g/L, syringaldehyde 0.19 g/L, and gallic acid 0.047

309

g/L. The inhibitory concentrations in this work were much lower than those obtained by

310

Ezeji et al. (2007) (syringaldehyde 0.3-1 g/L) and Cho et al. (2009) (0.17 g/L for vanillin

311

and syringaldehyde) who studied the inhibitory effect of model phenolic compounds

312

solutions. This was assigned to the synergy that can occur due to the coexistence of

313

different inhibitory compounds. In fact, as explained by Zha et al. (2014) the threshold

314

toxicity of a specific compound present in a biomass hydrolysate can be much lower than

315

that evaluated in a synthetic medium.

316 317 318 319

3.3. Effect of hydrolysate flocculation on the ABE fermentation In the next phase of the experimental program, the hydrolysate was subjected to flocculation prior to being used for butanol fermentation at different dilutions, as described 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

320

previously. As illustrated on Figure 4A and 4B, for the same phenolic concentrations, the

321

flocculated hydrolysate shows a reduction of the lag phase for the growth of Clostridium,

322

relatively to the untreated hydrolysate, suggesting that the microorganism can easily adapt

323

to the fermentation medium. Avoiding extended lag phases would constitute a significant

324

advantage when scaling up the process to an industrial size.

325

As shown in Figure 3B, an increase of ABE production was observed, compared to the

326

control synthetic medium (5.82 g/L ABE) without inhibitors during a 144h fermentation; a

327

maximum solvent concentration of 6.00 and 6.40 g/L was reached in the presence of 0.3

328

and 0.17 g/L of phenols, respectively. These values are 88% higher than those obtained

329

with the untreated hydrolysate with the same phenolic compounds concentration. After 2.5

330

and 1.5 fold dilution, achieving 0.6 g/L and 1.1 g/L of phenols, the respective ABE

331

production was 2.6 g/L and 0.6 g/L. These results are important in view of the lack of

332

production observed with untreated hydrolysate at the same phenolics concentrations. An

333

accumulation of acetic acid, reaching concentrations of 6.7 g/L and 7.4 g/L for the same

334

concentrations of phenolics, was observed in the experiments with low ABE yield, as

335

illustrated on Figure3B. When using undiluted flocculated hydrolysate with a total

336

phenolics concentration of 1.65 g/L, the acetic acid was as high as 10 g/L with no ABE

337

production. In fact, for high concentrations of acetic acid, the culture does not enter in the

338

solvatogenic phase, because the accumulation of the acid is detrimental for the

339

solvatogenic clostridia nutrient uptake and the cell growth (Ezeji et al., 2010). The reason

340

behind this behavior may be related to the fact that phenolic compounds interfere with the

341

metabolic pathway by preventing the re-assimilation of the organic acids into acetyl-CoA

342

and butyryl-CoA and further conversion into ethanol and butanol (Baral & Shah, 2014).

343

Interestingly, the flocculation reduced the level of inhibition exerted by phenols on

344

cell growth and enhanced the ABE production. Moreover, the flocculation removal 14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

345

efficiency on monomeric phenols was different from that observed on total phenols. As

346

shown in Table 4, where three monomeric phenols are represented, the flocculation

347

achieved a removal efficiency of 32% for vanillin, 55% for syringaldehyde and 100% for

348

gallic acid, as compared to 56.6 % for total phenols. These results demonstrate that

349

flocculation removes phenolic compounds in different proportions as function of their

350

ability to form aggregates with ferric sulfate. They also suggest that the proposed

351

detoxification method may contribute to the removal of other unidentified or non-analyzed

352

monomeric phenols that may have higher inhibitory effect. Thus, at the same phenols

353

concentration, an untreated and a flocculated hydrolysate do not contain the same

354

proportions of phenols monomers and as a consequence they will not present the same

355

inhibitory effect. Taken together, these reasons could explain the raise of the total phenols

356

inhibition levels from 0.3 g/L for an untreated hydrolysate to 1.1 g/L for a flocculated

357

hydrolysate (Figure 3A and 3B). This further supports the conclusion that flocculation is an

358

effective detoxification method for the removal of phenolic compounds.

359 360

3.4. Effect of combining pre-hydrolysate concentration and hydrolysate flocculation

361

on the ABE fermentation

362

In the final stage of the experimental program, fermentation experiments were

363

conducted using the hydrolysate produced by the third detoxification technique, illustrated

364

in Figure 1. In this case, the pre-hydrolysate was first concentrated using the organic

365

membrane NF270 to increase the sugar concentration by 2.17 folds (Table 2) and was

366

subsequently subjected to flocculation under the same conditions. Since it was not possible

367

to get reliable results of OD at 600 nm in the case of C. acetobutylicum growth, because of

368

the high turbidity of the culture medium, the sugar consumption and the solvent production

369

were used as criteria for comparison with the other experiments, as recommended by (Zha 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

370

et al., 2014). Figure 3C shows that by applying this detoxification strategy, the ABE

371

production was about 3.77 g/L and 4.25 g/L for phenolics respective concentrations of 0.3

372

and 0.17 g/L. These values are approximately 35% lower than those obtained with the

373

flocculated hydrolysate at the same phenolics concentrations, despite the fact that the

374

flocculation efficiency was approximately the same in both cases (58% VS 56.6%).

375

Thereby, the fact of overly diluting the hydrolysate in the seconf detoxification strategy to

376

achieve the same concentration of phenolic compounds may reduce the concentrations of

377

other compounds reported to be beneficial for the fermentation. Similar level of inhibition

378

was obtained at phenolics concentration of 1.1 g/L, an accumulation of 7.74 g/L of acetic

379

acid and ABE production of 0.2 g/L, as with a flocculated hydrolysate. By applying

380

nanofiltration, the main objective was to concentrate the pre-hydrolysate in order to

381

increase sugar concentration, to reduce the cost of the acid hydrolysis step (amount of acid

382

added, volume to be heated). During concentration, nanofiltraion has also allowed the

383

removal of acetic acid, HMF and furfural. However, its combination with flocculation was

384

not more efficient than flocculation alone. It is then recommended to apply another

385

technique before or after flocculation to improve the inhibitors removal efficiency. The

386

economic viability of the overall process should be taken into account.

387

A comparison of productivities and yields for different fermentation conditions are

388

shown in Figure 5. At phenolics concentrations of 0.17 g/L and 0.3 g/L, the fermentation

389

experiment using untreated hydrolysate did not reach more than 0.005 g/L.h of

390

productivity with sugar consumptions of 9.40 g/L and 11.9 g/L (Figure 5A) and yields of

391

0.08 and 0.07 g/g, respectively (Figure 5C). The corresponding productivities were

392

improved to 0.041 g/L.h and 0.044 g/L.h using flocculated hydrolysate, and to 0.023 g/L.h

393

and 0.03 g/L.h using combined nanofiltration and flocculation (Figure 5B). Improvements

394

of 65% and 74% in ABE yields could be achieved from flocculated hydrolysate with a 16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

395

xylose consumption of 24.2 g/L and 28.4 g/L. An increase of ABE yield of 3.12-folds and

396

3.57-folds with the third detoxified hydrolysate was also observed for the same phenolics

397

concentration.

398 399 400

3.5. Comparison to other studies Various lignocellulosic feedstocks for bio-butanol production via ABE fermentation

401

have been used in previous studies and reported in the scientific literature but few of these

402

studies discuss the use of wood hydrolysates obtained from pulp and paper mills in

403

operation, thus emulating the concept of the integrated forest biorefinery. A study of the

404

ABE fermentation by C. beijerinckii of wood hydrolysate with a sugar mixture of glucose,

405

xylose and arabinose has been reported by Lu et al. (2013). The authors have investigated

406

the use of various techniques for the removal of inhibitors: adsorption by activated

407

charcoal achieving concentration of 9.98 g/L of total ABE, resin adsorption (11.4 g/L of

408

total ABE), and combined resin adsorption and gas stripping (17.7 g/L of total ABE).

409

However, the work presented herein seems to be the first to consider the validation of

410

flocculation and combined nanofiltration and flocculation as hemicellulosic wood

411

hydrolysate detoxification methods, prior to the ABE fermentation. Despite the fact that

412

the work was done under uncontrolled pH conditions, the results are close to those

413

obtained recently by Kudahettige-Nilsson et al. (2015). They have reported that at a

414

phenolic concentration of 0.6 g/L, the batch fermentation of a detoxified hardwood

415

hydrolysate using active carbon with pH control produced 2.2 g/L of ABE. Their process

416

resulted in a yield of 0.13 g/g with a solvent production efficiency of 33%, as compared to

417

a yield of 0.17g/g with a production efficiency of 43% obtained in the present study when

418

fermenting a flocculated hydrolysate at the same phenolics concentration (Figure 5C). The

419

pH control of the medium is considered as a key factor for the ABE fermentation 17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

420

enhancement (Jiang et al., 2014). This further demonstrates the effectiveness of

421

flocculation as a detoxification method and the feasibility of using a hemicellulosic wood

422

hydrolysate issued from dissolving Kraft pulp mill as an alternative renewable feedstock

423

for bio-butanol production via ABE fermentation. Further optimization work should be

424

undertaken to ensure detoxification of the hydrolysate to the feasible thresholds for the

425

ABE fermentation. The economic viability of the proposed process should also be

426

validated. Finally, means to reduce the cost of the fermentation medium should be

427

investigated. In this perspective, the use of low cost agricultural residues as a nitrogen

428

source in the stock solution is an opportunity worthy of further investigation.

429 430 431

4. Conclusions In this work, it has been demonstrated that the ABE fermentation of hemicellulosic

432

wood hydrolysates has been improved using dilution and flocculation or combined

433

nanofiltration and flocculation as downstream detoxification methods. Within the range of

434

conditions covered at a laboratory scale, the applied methods enhanced inhibitory levels

435

from 0.3 to 1.1 g/L of total phenols. Without dilutions, the residual total phenols

436

concentrations in the detoxified hydrolysates remain higher than the acceptable

437

fermentation thresholds. Therefore, it is recommended to investigate the use of different

438

hydrolysis methods generating less inhibitors, as well as combining flocculation with other

439

detoxification techniques such as enzymatic treatment.

440 441 442 443 444 18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

445

Acknowledgments:This work was supported by a grant from the College-University I2I

446

Program of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (grant

447

number 437803-12).The authors wish to express their gratitude to the Centre National en

448

Electrochimie et Technologies Environnementales (Shawinigan, QC) which hosted the

449

experimental work presented in this manuscript and provided staff support and equipment

450

and, to FPInnovations (Pointe-Claire, QC) which supplied the hemicelluloses pre-

451

hydrolysate samples. The authors are also thankful to Professor Jean Paris from the

452

Department of Chemical Engineering at Polytechnique Montréal for his valuable

453

contributions to this work and for reviewing the manuscript.

19

References 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

1.

2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11. 12.

13. 14.

15.

16.

17. 18.

Ajao, O., Le Hir, M., Rahni, M., Marinova, M., Chadjaa, H., Savadogo, O., 2015a. Concentration and Detoxification of Kraft Prehydrolysate by Combining Nanofiltration with Flocculation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 54(3), 1113-1122. Ajao, O., Rahni, M., Marinova, M., Chadjaa, H., Savadogo, O., 2015b. Retention and flux characteristics of nanofiltration membranes during hemicellulose prehydrolysate concentration. Chem. Eng. J. 260, 605-615. Baral, N., Shah, A., 2014. Microbial inhibitors: formation and effects on acetone-butanolethanol fermentation of lignocellulosic biomass. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98(22), 91519172. Ben Chaabane, F., Marchal, R., 2013. Upgrading the Hemicellulosic Fraction of Biomass into Biofuel. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. – Rev. IFP Energies nouvelles 68(4), 663-680. Burke, D.R., Anderson, J., Gilcrease, P.C., Menkhaus, T.J., 2011. Enhanced solid–liquid clarification of lignocellulosic slurries using polyelectrolyte flocculating agents. Biomass Bioenergy 35(1), 391-401. Cho, D., Lee, Y., Um, Y., Sang, B.-I., Kim, Y., 2009. Detoxification of model phenolic compounds in lignocellulosic hydrolysates with peroxidase for butanol production from Clostridium beijerinckii. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 83(6), 1035-1043. Choi, S., Lee, J., Jang, Y.-S., Park, J., Lee, S., Kim, I., 2012. Effects of nutritional enrichment on the production of acetone-butanol-ethanol (ABE) by Clostridium acetobutylicum. J. Microbiol. 50(6), 1063-1066. Duarte, G.V., Ramarao, B.V., Amidon, T.E., 2010. Polymer induced flocculation and separation of particulates from extracts of lignocellulosic materials. Bioresour. Technol. 101(22), 85268534. Ezeji, T., Milne, C., Price, N., Blaschek, H., 2010. Achievements and perspectives to overcome the poor solvent resistance in acetone and butanol-producing microorganisms. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 85(6), 1697-1712. Ezeji, T., Qureshi, N., Blaschek, H.P., 2007. Butanol production from agricultural residues: Impact of degradation products on Clostridium beijerinckii growth and butanol fermentation. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 97(6), 1460-1469. Green, E.M., 2011. Fermentative production of butanol—the industrial perspective. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 22(3), 337-343. Huang, H.-J., Ramaswamy, S., Al-Dajani, W.W., Tschirner, U., 2010. Process modeling and analysis of pulp mill-based integrated biorefinery with hemicellulose pre-extraction for ethanol production: A comparative study. Bioresour. Technol. 101(2), 624-631. Huang, H.-J., Ramaswamy, S., Tschirner, U.W., Ramarao, B.V., 2008. A review of separation technologies in current and future biorefineries. Sep. Purif. Technol. 62(1), 1-21. Ibraheem, O., Ndimba, B.K., 2013. Molecular Adaptation Mechanisms Employed by Ethanologenic Bacteria in Response to Lignocellulose-derived Inhibitory Compounds. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 9(6), 598-612. Jiang, W., Wen, Z., Wu, M., Li, H., Yang, J., Lin, J., Lin, Y., Yang, L., Cen, P., 2014. The Effect of pH Control on Acetone–Butanol–Ethanol Fermentation by Clostridium acetobutylicum ATCC 824 with Xylose and d-Glucose and d-Xylose Mixture. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 22(8), 937-942. Kudahettige-Nilsson, R.L., Helmerius, J., Nilsson, R.T., Sjöblom, M., Hodge, D.B., Rova, U., 2015. Biobutanol production by Clostridium acetobutylicum using xylose recovered from birch Kraft black liquor. Bioresour. Technol. 176(0), 71-79. Lee, S.Y., Park, J.H., Jang, S.H., Nielsen, L.K., Kim, J., Jung, K.S., 2008. Fermentative butanol production by clostridia. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 101(2), 209-228. Lu, C., Dong, J., Yang, S.-T., 2013. Butanol production from wood pulping hydrolysate in an integrated fermentation–gas stripping process. Bioresour. Technol. 143(0), 467-475. 20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

19. Marinova, M., Mateos-Espejel, E., Jemaa, N., Paris, J., 2009. Addressing the increased energy demand of a Kraft mill biorefinery: The hemicellulose extraction case. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 87(9), 1269-1275. 20. Marinova, M., Perrier, M., Paris, J., 2014. Implementation of a Forest Biomass-based Biofuel Industry: A Canadian Experience. in: International Conference on Renewable Energies and Power Quality (ICREPQ’14), Vol. No.12, Renew. Energy Power. Qual. J. (RE&PQJ). Cordoba (Spain), 8th to 10th April, 2014. 21. Palmqvist, E., Hahn-Hägerdal, B., 2000. Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. Bioresour. Technol. 74(1), 25-33. 22. Qi, B., Luo, J., Chen, X., Hang, X., Wan, Y., 2011. Separation of furfural from monosaccharides by nanofiltration. Bioresour. Technol. 102(14), 7111-7118. 23. Qureshi, N., Blaschek, H.P., 1999. Butanol recovery from model solution/fermentation broth by pervaporation: evaluation of membrane performance. Biomass Bioenergy 17(2), 175-184. 24. Qureshi, N., Bowman, M.J., Saha, B.C., Hector, R., Berhow, M.A., Cotta, M.A., 2012. Effect of cellulosic sugar degradation products (furfural and hydroxymethyl furfural) on acetone– butanol–ethanol (ABE) fermentation using Clostridium beijerinckii P260. Food Bioprod. Process. 90(3), 533-540. 25. Qureshi, N., Liu, S., Ezeji, T.C., 2013. Cellulosic Butanol Production from Agricultural Biomass and Residues: Recent Advances in Technology. in: Advanced Biofuels and Bioproducts, (Ed.) J.W. Lee, Springer New York, pp. 247-265. 26. Singleton, V.L., Rossi, J.A., 1965. Colorimetry of Total Phenolics with PhosphomolybdicPhosphotungstic Acid Reagents. Am. J. Enol. Viticulture 16(3), 144-158. 27. Stoklosa, R.J., Hodge, D.B., 2014. Chapter 4 - Integration of (Hemi)-Cellulosic Biofuels Technologies with Chemical Pulp Production. in: Biorefineries, (Ed.) N.Q.B.H.A. Vertès, Elsevier. Amsterdam, pp. 73-100. 28. van Heiningen, A., Genco, J., Yoon, S., Tunk, S.M., Zou, H., Luo, J., Mao, H., Pendse, H., 2011. Integrated Forest Biorefineries ? Near-Neutral Process. in: Sustainable Production of Fuels, Chemicals, and Fibers from Forest Biomass, Vol. 1067, Am. Chem. Soc. , pp. 443-473. 29. Wang, L., Chen, H., 2011. Increased fermentability of enzymatically hydrolyzed steamexploded corn stover for butanol production by removal of fermentation inhibitors. Process Biochem. 46(2), 604-607. 30. Wei, P., Cheng, L.-H., Zhang, L., Xu, X.-H., Chen, H.-l., Gao, C.-J., 2014. A review of membrane technology for bioethanol production. Renew. Sustainable Energy Rev. 30(0), 388-400. 31. Yasarla, L.R., Ramarao, B.V., 2012. Dynamics of Flocculation of Lignocellulosic Hydrolyzates by Polymers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51(19), 6847-6861. 32. Yasarla, L.R., Ramarao, B.V., 2013. Lignin Removal from Lignocellulosic Hydrolyzates by Flocculation with Polyethylene Oxide. J.Biobased. Mater. Bio. 7(6), 684-689. 33. Zha, Y., Westerhuis, J., Muilwijk, B., Overkamp, K., Nijmeijer, B., Coulier, L., Smilde, A., Punt, P., 2014. Identifying inhibitory compounds in lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysates using an exometabolomics approach. BMC Biotechnol. 14(1), 22. 34. Zhang, Y., Han, B., Ezeji, T.C., 2012. Biotransformation of furfural and 5-hydroxymethyl furfural (HMF) by Clostridium acetobutylicum ATCC 824 during butanol fermentation. New Biotechnol. 29(3), 345-351.

21

Figure captions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

Figure 1. Flow diagram – from pre-hydrolysate to fermentation: (1) Untreated hydrolysate; (2) Detoxification by flocculation after hydrolysis; (3) Pre-hydrolysate concentration by nanofiltration followed by flocculation of the obtained hydrolysate. Figure 2. Production of ABE in xylose synthetic medium at 37°C using C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 under uncontrolled pH and static conditions: (A) acids production and pH profile; (B) biomass, xylose consumption and ABE production. Figure 3. Effect of phenols concentration on ABE and acids production; fermentation of wood hydrolysates for 144h by C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 at 37°C and under controlled pH conditions: (A) untreated hydrolysate; (B) flocculated hydrolysate; (C) nanofiltered/flocculated hydrolysate. Figure 4. Growth behavior of C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 (Biomass: OD 600nm) at 37°C, uncontrolled pH and static conditions, using as a carbon source: (A) untreated hydrolysate; (B) flocculated hydrolysate. Figure 5. Comparison of: (A) xylose consumption; (B) productivity; (C) ABE yield, obtained by C. acetobutylicum from untreated, flocculated or nonofiltrated/flocculated hydrolysate with different phenolics concentrations after 144h of fermentation at 37°C and uncontrolled pH.

22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

Table1. Composition of untreated and treated hemicelluloses hydrolysates generated after detoxification. Compounds Concentration (g/L)

Untreated hydrolysatea

Total sugars Total phenols Acetic acid HMF Furfural

29.7±0.35 3.8±0.06 10.7±0.3 0.10±0.002 0.18±0.008

Neutralized hydrolysateb 29.2±0.36 2.3±0.05 2.6±0.08 0.08±0.001 0.17±0.007

Flocculated hydrolysatec 26.7±0.32 1.65±0.03 2.2±0.06 0.08±0.001 0.17±0.008

Pre-hydrolysate concentration / Hydrolysate flocculationd 63.2±1 3±0.02 2.2±0.06 0.2±0.004 1.02±0.04

The results are an average of three replicates with standard deviation. a : Untreated hydrolysate at pH 1.34. b : Hydrolysate neutralized with Ca(OH)2 at pH 6.8. c : Flocculated hydrolysate neutralized to pH 6.8 with Ca(OH)2. d : Hydrolysate generated after pre-hydrolysate concentration, hydrolysis, flocculation and neutralization to pH 6.8 with Ca(OH)2.

23

Table 2. Evolution of inhibitors and sugar concentration during treatment of hydrolysate by 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

combining flocculation and nanofiltration. Compounds concentration (g/L) Sugars Phenolic compounds Acetic acid HMF Furfural

Prehydrolysatea

Concentrated pre-hydrolysate b

Produced hydrolysatec

Flocculated hydrolysated

3.43±0.1

6.31±0.3

72.0±1.1

63.2±1

4.51±0.01

13.4±0.03

7.20±0.008

3.00±0.02

2.80±0.08 0.09±0.002 0.65±0.03

2.40±0.07 0.05±0.001 0.5±0.02

9.40±0.26 0.25±0.005 1.92±0.09

2.10±0.06 0.19±0.004 1.02±0.05

The results are an average of three replicates with standard deviation. a : Untreated pre-hydrolysate b : Concentrated pre-hydrolysate by nanofiltration using NF270 membrane. c : Corresponding concentrated hydrolysate generated after acid hydrolysis with sulfuric acid. d : Flocculated and neutralized concentrated hydrolysate at pH 6.8

24

Table 3. Reduction of phenolic compounds concentrations in generated hydrolysates with 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

several dilutions.

Hydrolysates

Dilution

Phenols

Xylose added

factor

(g/L)

(g/L)

0

2.30

32.0

3.5

0.66

52.0

7.5

0.31

56.3

13

0.17

57.9

0

1.65

33.3

1.5

1.10

35.7

2.5

0.66

49.3

3.5

0.30

52.4

9.5

0.17

57.2

Untreated hydrolysate

Flocculated hydrolysate

Pre-hydrolysate concentration by nanofiltraltion

0

3.00

0

2.5

1.20

6.94

+

5

0.60

9.47

Hydrolysate

10

0.30

10.7

17.5

0.17

11.2

Flocculation

25

Table 4. Concentration and percentage elimination of some phenolic compounds found in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

wood hydrolysate before and after flocculation with ferric sulfate. Untreated

Flocculated

hydrolysatea

hydrolysateb

(g/L)

(g/L)

Gallic acid

0.047±0.001

0

100

Vanilin

0.042±0.004

0.028±0.003

32

Syringaldehyde

0.19±0.003

0.049±0.001

55

Phenolic compounds

Removal (%)

The results are an average of three replicates with standard deviation. a : Untreated hydrolysate neutralized at pH 6.8. b : Flocculated and neutralized hydrolysate at pH 6.

26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

Wood chip pre-hydrolysis

(1) Acid hydrolysis

(2)

(3)

Acid hydrolysis

Concentration by nanofiltration (NF270)

Coagulationflocculation

Acid hydrolysis

Coagulationflocculation

Dilution of hydrolysates

ABE fermentation by C. acetobutylicum ATCC 824 under static and uncontrolled pH conditions.

Figure 1.

27

A

6,2

3,0

6,0

2,5

5,8 5,6 5,4

1,5

1,0

pH

Acids (g/L)

2,0

5,2

pH Acetic acid Butyric acid

5,0

0,5

4,8 4,6

0,0 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Fermentation time (h)

B

5 4 3 2 1 0

6 50 Acetone Ethanol Butanol Xylose Biomass Total ABE

4

40

2

Xylose (g/L)

6

60

Acids and solvants (g/L)

7

OD 600nm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

30

0

20 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Fermentation time (h)

Figure 2.

28

12 1,2

A 10 1,0

0,8

Acetone Ethanol Butnaol Total ABE Acetic Acid Butyric Acid

0,6

Acids (g/L)

Products (g/L)

8

6

4

0,4 2 0,2

0

0,0 0.17

0.3

2.3

Phenols (g/L)

7

12

6

10

5

8

4

6

Acetone Ethanol Butanol Total ABE Acetic Acid Butyric Acid

3

2

4

Acids (g/L)

Products (g/L)

B

2

1

0

0

-2 0.17

0.3

0.6

1.1

1.65

Phenols (g/L) 5

16

C

14

4

12 10

3

Acetone Ethanol Butanol Total ABE Acetic acid Butyric acid

2

8 6

Acids (g/L)

Products (g/L)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

4 2

1

0 0 0.17

0.3

0.6

1.1

3.0

Phenols (g/L)Fig.3.

Figure 3.

29

A 3,0 2.3 g/L of phenols 0.3 g/L of phenols 0.17 g/L of phenols

2,5

OD 600 nm

2,0

1,5

1,0

0,5

0,0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Fermentation time (h)

B

3,5

3,0 1.65 g/L of phenols 1.1 g/L of phenols 0.66 g/L of phenols 0.33 g/L of phenols 0.17 g/L of phenols

2,5

OD 600 nm

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

2,0

1,5

1,0

0,5

0,0 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Fermentation Time (h)

Figure 4.

30

A Flocculated hydrolysate 30 Concentrated and flocculated hydrolysate

20 10

Untreated hydrolysate

0 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.17 Total phenolic compound (g/L)

Productivity (g/L.h)

B

Flocculated hydrolysate

0.06 0.04

Concentrated and flocculated hydrolysate

0.02

Untreated hydrolysate

0.00 1.1

0.6

0.3 0.17

Total phenolic compounds (g/L)

C

Concentrated and flocculated hydrolysate 0.3 Flocculated hydrolysate Yield (g/g)

Xylose consumption (g/L)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

0.2 0.1

Untreated hydrolysate

0 1.1

0.6

0.3

0.17

Total phenolic compounds (g/L)

Figure 5.

31

Highlights: 

Hardwood pre-hydrolysates from dissolving pulp mill were used for ABE fermentation.



Flocculation was the most efficient method for inhibitors removal.



Detoxification increased the phenolics inhibitory level on ABE production up to 1.1 g/L.