Abstract
Conventional resources becoming limited due to the increase in population and energy demand. This rise in energy demand has increased consumer prices and pressure on the environment. This prompted researchers to take care of sustainable energy resources. In this case, biomass is only environmentally friendly renewable resource which is used for the production of chemicals and fuels. A system similar to a petroleum refinery is required to produce fuels and useful chemicals from biomass and is known as a biorefinery. Biorefineries have been subdivided into various categories on the basis of technology and biomass used. In this chapter, types of biorefineries and microbes which are used for the production of valuable products are discussed.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
11.1 Introduction
International Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Task 42 has defined biorefinery as the sustainable processing of biomass into a variety of marketable products (food, feed, materials, chemicals) and energy (fuels, power, heat) (de Jong and Jungmeier 2015). The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) defined biorefinery as a facility that facilitates conversion of biomass into fuels, power, and chemicals. A biorefinery can utilize all types of biomass and producing agricultural by-products (wheat bran, rapeseed meal, straw, corn stover, bagasse), waste from the food industry (including kitchen and household waste), grains/cereals (wheat, maize, corn, soybean), starch and sugars, aquatic biomass (algae and seaweeds), as well as wood and lignocellulosic materials. A biorefinery is not a completely new concept.
According to Berntsson et al., biorefinery promotes industrial trades, economic, and environmental sustainability. Biorefineries are found helpful in generating added-value products, bio-based products, and bioenergy utilizing sustainable biomass (de Jong and Jungmeier 2015). As per the increasing energy demand nowadays, interest of scientists is increasing in renewable and sustainable biotechnological processes for energy, biofuels, and chemicals. Use of microorganisms in chemical industries is to derive the same product; using biological materials is an alternative sustainable and economical approach. It is estimated that by 2025, 15% of chemical products will be bioformulated (Vijayendran 2010). Thus, the development of biorefineries is an alternative to diesel and petroleum-based products. Biorefineries can be defined as processing of biomass (mainly lignocelluloses) into marketable and commercial products (food, feed, material, and chemicals) and energy (fuels, power, and heat) mediated by physical, chemical, or biological materials (IEA 2010).
The biorefinery concept is eye-catching because it facilitates production of high added-value products at lesser price and reducing waste disposal and maintaining ecological harmony. Few biorefineries have established, for instance, the pulp- and paper-based biorefinery, Borregaard, in Norway (Borregaard 2014), but attempts are required to establish such biorefineries in several other countries aswell. Microorganisms are the basis of biorefineries and backbone of industrial bioprocesses; they either produce desired chemical or produce intermediate required for the process. Most of the industries in world utilize the potential of microorganisms for the production of food additives, medicines, antibiotics, enzymes, bioethanol, biodiesel, and other chemicals. Lignocellulosic biomass is the most abundant biomass on earth obtained as agricultural by-product and renewable source of sugars, and is an advisable feedstock for the production of biodiesel, biogas, biohydrogen, and chemical products through the biorefinery processes (Menon and Rao 2012). In biorefinery processes, lignocellulosic biomass is firstly pre-treated, and then cellulosic and hemicellulosic are decomposed into simple sugars mediated by enzymes (Rastegari et al. 2019a). Microbes metabolize and ferment these simple sugars producing chemical products such as alcohols, fatty acids, organic acids, and amino acids. Bioethanol is a more preferred alternative over conventional petroleum-based transport fuels. However, complex structure of lignocellulosic biomass is a challenge in its bioconversion than simple starch and sugar materials (Mussatto et al. 2010; Yadav et al. 2020). Cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin are building blocks of lignocellulosic biomass.
Biorefineries have led new opportunities to the industrial application of microorganisms. Potential of unexplored or new microbe for desired product can be checked. New substrates may be added, and along with these industrial processes can be optimized to achieve maximum conversion processes. In addition, we highlight and exemplify general strategies to develop microorganisms that are able to produce fuels and chemicals from renewable feedstocks. All types of biomass from forestry, aquaculture, agriculture, organic and forest residues, and aquatic biomass (algae and seaweeds) are converted into valuable products of humankind. Many of the industries converting sugar, starch, pulp, and paper industries are considered as biorefineries. There are many differences between refineries and biorefineries (Table 11.1).
11.2 Classification of Biorefineries
Biorefineries have been classified in different categories on the basis of different criteria (de Jong and Jungmeier 2015). On the basis of technologies used, biorefineries are divided into conventional and advanced biorefineries: first-, second-, and third-generation biorefineries. On the basis of raw material used, biorefineries are divided into whole crop biorefineries, oleochemical biorefineries, lignocellulosic feedstock biorefineries, green biorefineries, and marine biorefineries. On the basis of conversion process used, biorefineries are divided into thermochemical biorefineries, biochemical biorefineries, and two-platform concept biorefineries. On the basis of intermediate produced, biorefineries are syngas platform biorefineries and sugar platform biorefineries. On the basis of availability of biomass, biorefineries have been classified into six types (Lange 2017). Yellow biorefinery utilize straw, corn stover, and wood. Green biorefinery utilizes fresh green biomass, grass for protein-rich feed. Blue biorefineries use fish by-catch/cut-offs, fish discards and innards, mussels as biomass, brown seaweed, red and green algae, and invertebrates such as sea cucumber. Red biorefinery utilizes slaughterhouse waste. White biorefinery uses agro-industry-side streams.
11.3 Microbial Fermentation Processes for the Development of Biorefineries
Due to large consumption of fuels and foods, sustainable way to produce new foods and fuels from agro-residues is required. Sustainable production is an effective technology utilizing raw materials, agro-waste to produce new, commercial, and valuable products. Solid-state fermentation is an alternative and long term used approach for the production of biotechnology-based commercial products. Fermentation technology of microbes has been used in East for the manufacture of fermented foods and for manufacture of mold-ripened cheese in West. In fermentation technology, microbes are allowed to grow on solid material with low moisture content. Fermentation is an economical, large-scale process of bioconversion and biodegradation process. With the aid of this technology food, enzymes, chemicals, cosmetics, and pharmaceutical compounds have been produced (Kour et al. 2019a; Kumar et al. 2019). This fermentation technology is driving attention of researchers widely nowadays. Various alternative terms are currently being used as synonyms of solid-state fermentation likewise solid-state fermentation, surface cultivation, surface culture, solid-state digestion, and solid-state fermentation.
Botella et al. (2009) used a new term “particulate bioprocessing”, in order to define solid-state fermentation. Particulate bioprocessing defines growth of microorganism in moist condition in a particulate solid medium. Amore and Faraco (2012) used the term consolidated bioprocessing (CBP) defining fungi as alternative microbe for the degradation of lignocellulosic materials. Cellulose degrading fungi produce saccharolytic enzymes for the digestion of lignocellulose and converting sugars to ethanol. These technologies reduce the cost of production of ethanol and show that the fungi have all the pathways required for conversion of lignocellulose to bioethanol. Viniegra-Gonzàlez (1997) defined solid-state fermentation as a process where microbes grow on the surface of solid material without the addition of nutrients. Pandey et al. (2000) defined solid-state fermentation, a technology, where microbes are grown on moist solid support, either on inert carriers or on insoluble substrates that can also be used as carbon and energy source.
Rahardjo et al. (2006) defined solid-state fermentation as the growth of microorganisms on moistened solid substrate with enough moisture is to maintain microbial growth and metabolism. Adopting the technology of solid-state fermentation, microbes have been used in biorefineries for conversion of sugar containing polymers such as cellulose and hemicellulose in commercial products. Biofuels, bioethanol, biomethanol, biogas, pharmaceutical products, and biodegradable products have been produced using microbes (Koutinas et al. 2007). Webb et al. proposed a model for wheat-based biorefining strategy in economical way using microbial fermentation (Fig. 11.1).
11.4 Genetic Improvement of Microorganisms for Development of Biorefinery Products
Microbial strains are required which can result in high yield and productivity of compounds tolerating several stresses (Rastegari et al. 2019b, c). For the same, microbes are genetically modified. S. cerevisiae has been used in bio-industries since last 30 years, each year with an improved version. Different strategies have been adopted for this genetic engineering likewise (i) driving carbon flux, (ii) increase tolerance to toxic compounds, (iii) increase of substrate uptake range, and (iv) generation of new products (Fig. 11.2).
11.4.1 Driving Carbon Flux
Naturally, microbes have capability to produce desired chemical compounds, and they are optimized for maximal growth. But the production of bioactive compounds is hindered due to expense of carbon, energy, and by-product formation. Thus, modifications in microorganisms which lead to higher production are driving carbon flux. Microbes of different groups such as bacteria, fungi, and yeast have been genetically modified to enhance production of biofuel and desired compounds. Microbial strains which are able to produce 90% m/m of desired chemical compound are available (Table 11.2). There are many steps where microbes have been modified such as modification in microbial metabolism by overexpression or knockout of enzymes (Jiang et al. 2009; Mojzita et al. 2010), modification in transcription and change in redox reactions (Alper and Stephanopoulos 2007; Almeida et al. 2009; Nissen et al. 2000). For instance, S. cerevisiae is modified to produce ethanol from sugars present in lignocellulosic biomass (Hahn-Hägerdal et al. 2007).
11.4.2 Increased Tolerance to the Substrate
Low tolerance to end product also hampers product formation by microbes. Fermentation medium also causes a harsh environment for the microorganism. In case of unavailability of tolerant strains, genetic engineering approaches have been used to improve strain response for toxic and end product. Strains have been improved to produce biofuels from lignocellulosic hydrolysate. Lignocellulose is composed of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin (Hahn-Hägerdal et al. 2007). Prior to fermentation, this hydrolysate is allowed for pretreatment to reduce its recalcitrance. Later, it is allowed for hydrolysis where sugar monomers have been formed from cellulose and hemicellulose. These sugar monomers form biofuels. During this pretreatment and hydrolysis, many toxic compounds are produced which inhibit microbial processes, microbial metabolism, and microbial growth as well. Compounds like furaldehyde, organic acids (acetic, levulinic, and furoic), and phenolic derivatives are found in lignocellulose. These compounds inhibit microbial growth, cause lowering in product yield, and reduce cellular viability (Almeida et al. 2007, 2011). Metabolic engineering and genetic engineering have been applied to make these strains tolerant. S. passalidarum, S. cerevisiae, and P. stipites have been evolutionary engineered to ferment lignocellulose more than the native strains (Heer and Sauer 2008; Hughes et al. 2012; Liu et al. 2004; Kour et al. 2019b). Yeast tolerance to lignocellulose has been improved by genetic engineering (Almeida et al. 2011) (Table 11.2). Genes having resistance to inhibitors are transferred in microbial strain for providing tolerance to end product.
11.4.3 Increase of Substrate Uptake Range
Genetic engineering of microbes has been done to increase substrate and its better utilization in product formation. Utilization of lignocellulosic biomass requires xylose utilization. Xylose is the second most abundant pentose sugar present in sugarcane bagasse (30%) (Ferreira-Leitão et al. 2010). Naturally, S. cerevisiae does not utilize pentose sugars; it is genetically modified to use this pentose sugar (Table 11.2).
11.4.4 New Products
Genetically modified microorganisms are able to produce compounds that are not possible by natural pathways. For this, enzymes and pathways from one organism have been transferred in an organism of choice. Nowadays, many new compounds have been reported by microbes rather than bioethanol which increase economy and can be produced in lesser time (Table 11.2). Acids produced from this lignocellulose serve as precursors of plastics (Werpy et al. 2004). Acetobacter, Aerobacter, Pseudomonas, Gluconobacter, and Erwinia produce a five-carbon acid xylonic acid, derived from xylose. Obviously, wild-type bacteria are able to produce this xylonic acid; however, this yield was very low. E. coli, S. cerevisiae, Kluyveromyces lactis, and Pichia kudriavzevii have been produced by genetic recombination to enhance yield of this xylonic acid (Toivari et al. 2010; Nygård et al. 2011; Liu et al. 2012).
11.5 Microbial Technologies for Biodiesel-Based Biorefineries
Production of biofuels from renewable feedstocks is demanded in the period of crisis of energy where petrol fuels are becoming limited and expensive (Rastegari et al. 2020; Yadav et al. 2019). Production of biofuels is a costly process, and various residues are produced; however, this cost can be reduced if residues can be converted into valuable coproducts (Zhang 2011; Yazdani and Gonzalez 2007). Biodiesel is an alternative biofuel obtained by the transesterification of fat and vegetable oils and reduces net greenhouse effect (O’Connor 2011). Many plants such as sunflower, soybean, rape, and palm oils are used to produce biodiesel. In Brazil, soybean oil was the source of 80% of biodiesel in 2010. Pies and glycerol are produced as residues in the production of biodiesel. Pies are used as animal feed or fertilizers, whereas glycerol is used as crude sample in biorefineries and many valuable products are formed (Fig. 11.3).
Many microbes such as Klebsiella, Enterobacter, Clostridium, Yeasts, and filamentous fungi are used for the production of organic acids, polyols, 1,3-propanediol, 2,3-butanediol, butanol, and ethanol (Yadav et al. 2017). 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PDO) can be produced by Klebsiella spp. and Clostridium spp. from glycerol (Celinska 2010). K. pneumoniae G31 also produces 2,3-Butanediol (BDO) from the fermentation of glycerol (Petrov and Petrova 2009). This BDO can be used in the preparation of synthetic rubber, plastics, and as a precursor of pharmaceutical drugs and medicine (Syu 2001; Ji et al. 2011). Ethanol is a widely used fuel and solvent in industries, produced from lignocellulose by yeasts. However, there are many reports where glycerol also acts as a source of ethanol (Liu et al. 2007; Petrov and Petrova 2009). E. coli can convert glycerol to ethanol aerobically and anaerobically (Dharmadi et al. 2006; Durnin et al. 2009). Hansenula polymorpha, a methylotrophic yeast, possesses potential to produce ethanol from glycerol (Hong et al. 2010). Genes encoding for pyruvate decarboxylase and aldehyde dehydrogenase II, from Zymomonas mobilis, are transferred into H. polymorpha, and increase in ethanol production was found (Hong et al. 2010). Butanol is an alternative fuel which is used in the manufacturing of plastics, paints, resin formulation, and lacquers (Harvey and Meylemans 2011). C. pasteurianum has been found to produce butanol from glycerol (Taconi et al. 2009). Apart from these, glycerol has been used to produce mannitol, arabitol, erythritol, succinic acid, lactic acid, oxalic acid, citric acid, and glyceric acid (Table 11.3).
11.6 Conclusion
Plant cell wall is composed of cellulose and lignin, which are very complex and poorly understood. Utilization of this for bioenergy needs more understanding and research inputs. In biorefineries, a consortium of microbes is used, where microbe–microbe interaction takes place. Attention should be paid toward population dynamics, interrelationship between species for scale-up of a process. It is possible to optimize microbial processes with the aid of computer simulations. Application of biotechnological aspects such as CRISPR/Cas, genome shuffling, transcription, and translational machinery in microbes can make them more potent for biorefineries
References
Almeida JR, Modig T, Petersson A, Hähn-Hägerdal B, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2007) Increased tolerance and conversion of inhibitors in lignocellulosic hydrolysatesby Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 82:340–349
Almeida JRM, Bertilsson M, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund M-F (2009) Carbon fluxes of xylose-consuming Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains are affected differently by NADH and NADPH usage in HMF reduction. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 84:751–761
Almeida JRM, Röder A, Modig T, Laadan B, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund M-F (2008) NADH- vs NADPH-coupled reduction of 5-hydroxymethyl furfural (HMF) and its implications on product distribution in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 78:939–945
Almeida JRM, Runquist D, Sànchez i Nogué V, Lidén G, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2011) Stress-related challenges in pentose fermentation to ethanol by the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol J 6:286–299
Alper H, Stephanopoulos G (2007) Global transcription machinery engineering: a new approach for improving cellular phenotype. Metab Eng 9:258–267
Alsaker K, Spitzer T, Papoutsakis E (2004) Transcriptional analysis of spo0A overexpression in clostridium acetobutylicum and its effect on the cell’s response to butanol stress. J Bacteriol 186:1959–1971
Amore A, Faraco V (2012) Potential of fungi as category I Consolidated BioProcessing organisms for cellulosic ethanol production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16(5):3286–3301
Andre A, Diamantopoulou P, Philippoussis A, Sarris D, Komaitis M, Papanikolaou S (2010) Biotechnological conversions of bio-diesel derived waste glycerol into added-value compounds by higher fungi: production of biomass, single cell oil and oxalic acid. Ind Crop Prod 31:407–416
Blankschien MD, Clomburg JM, Gonzalez R (2010) Metabolic engineering of Escherichia coli for the production of succinate from glycerol. Metab Eng 12:409–419
Botella C, Diaz AB, Wang R, Koutinas A, Webb C (2009) Particulate bioprocessing: a novel process strategy for biorefineries. Process Biochem 44(5):546–555
Causey TB, Zhou S, Shanmugam KT, Ingram LO (2003) Engineering the metabolism of Escherichia coli W3110 for the conversion of sugar to redox-neutral and oxidized products: homoacetate production. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:825–832
Celinska E (2010) Debottlenecking the 1,3-propanediol pathway by metabolic engineering. Biotechnol Adv 28:519–530
Chen X, Zhang DJ, Qi WT, Gao SJ, Xiu ZL, Xu P (2003) Microbial fed-batc production of 1,3-propanediol by Klebsiella pneumoniae under micro-aerobic conditions. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 63:143–146
de Jong E, Jungmeier G (2015) Biorefinery concepts in comparison to petrochemical refineries. In: Industrial biorefineries & white biotechnology. Elsevier, pp 3–33
Dharmadi Y, Murarka A, Gonzalez R (2006) Anaerobic fermentation of glycerol by Escherichia coli: a new platform for metabolic engineering. Biotechnol Bioeng 94(5):821–829
Durnin G, Clomburg J, Yeates Z, Alvarez PJJ, Zygourakis K, Campbell P, Gonzalez R (2009) Understanding and harnessing the microaerobic metabolism of glycerol in Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Bioeng 103:148–161
Ferreira-Leitão V, Perrone CC, Rodrigues J, Franke APM, Macrelli S, Zacchi G (2010) An approach to the utilisation of CO2 as impregnating agent in steam pretreatment of sugar cane bagasse and leaves for ethanol production. Biotechnol Biofuels 3:7
Habe H, Shimada Y, Yakushi T, Hattori H, Ano Y, Fukuoka T, Kitamoto D, Itagaki M, Watanabe K, Yanagishita H (2009) Microbial production of glyceric acid, an organic acid that can be mass produced from glycerol. Appl Environ Microb 75:7760–7766
Hahn-Hägerdal B, Karhumaa K, Fonseca C, Spencer-Martins I, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2007) Towards industrial pentose-fermenting yeast strains. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 74:937–953
Harvey BG, Meylemans HA (2011) The role of butanol in the development of sustainable fuel technologies. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 86(1):2–9
Heer D, Sauer U (2008) Identification of furfural as a key toxin in lignocellulosichydrolysates and evolution of a tolerant yeast strain. Microb Biotechnol 1:497–506
Hong AA, Cheng KK, Peng F, Zhou S, Sun Y, Liu CM, Liu DH (2009) Strain isolation and optimization of process parameters for bioconversion of glycerol to lactic acid. J Chem Technol Biot 84:1576–1581
Hong WK, Kim CH, Heo SY, Luo LH, Oh BR, Seo JW (2010) Enhanced production of ethanol from glycerol by engineered Hansenula polymorpha expressing pyruvate decarboxylase and aldehyde dehydrogenase genes from Zymomonas mobilis. Biotechnol Lett 32(8):1077–1082
Hu ZC, Liu ZQ, Zheng YG, Shen YC (2010) Production of 1,3-Dihydroxyacetone from Glycerol by Gluconobacter oxydans ZJB09112. J Microbiol Biotechnol 20:340–345
Hughes SR, Gibbons WR, Bang SS, Pinkelman R, Bischoff KM, Slininger PJ, Qureshi N, Kurtzman CP, Liu S, Saha BC, Jackson JS, Cotta M, Rich JO, Javers JE (2012) Random UV-C mutagenesis of Scheffersomyces (formerly Pichia) stipitis NRRL Y-7124 to improve anaerobic growth on lignocellulosic sugars. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 39:163–173
Ibrahim MHA, Steinbuchel A (2009) Poly(3-Hydroxybutyrate) Production from Glycerol by Zobellella denitrificans MW1 via High-Cell-Density Fed-Batch fermentation and simplified solvent extraction. Appl Environ Microb 75:6222–6231
Inui M, Suda M, Kimura S, Yasuda K, Suzuki H, Toda H, Yamamoto S, Okino S, Suzuki N, Yukawa H (2008) Expression of Clostridium acetobutylicumbutanol synthetic genes in Escherichia coli. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 77:1305–1316
Ji XJ, Huang H, Ouyang PK (2011) Microbial 2,3-butanediol production: A state-of-the -art review. Biotechnol Adv 29:351–364
Jiang Y, Xu C, Dong F, Yang Y, Jiang W, Yang S (2009) Disruption of the acetoacetate decarboxylase gene in solvent-producing Clostridium acetobutylicum increases the butanol ratio. Metab Eng 11:284–291
Karhumaa K, Garcia Sanchez R, Hahn-Hägerdal B, Gorwa-Grauslund M-F (2007) Comparison of the xylose reductase-xylitol dehydrogenase and the xylose isomerase pathways for xylose fermentation by recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microb Cell Fact 6:5
Khan A, Bhide A, Gadre R (2009) Mannitol production from glycerol by resting cells of Candida magnoliae. Bioresour Technol 100:4911–4913
Koganti S, Kuo TM, Kurtzman CP, Smith N, Ju LK (2011) Production of arabitol from glycerol: strain screening and study of factors affecting production yield. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 90:257–267
Kour D, Rana KL, Yadav N, Yadav AN, Rastegari AA, Singh C et al (2019a) Technologies for biofuel production: current development, challenges, and future prospects. In: Rastegari AA, Yadav AN, Gupta A (eds) Prospects of renewable bioprocessing in future energy systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14463-0_1
Kour D, Rana KL, Yadav N, Yadav AN, Singh J, Rastegari AA et al (2019b) Agriculturally and industrially important fungi: current developments and potential biotechnological applications. In: Yadav AN, Singh S, Mishra S, Gupta A (eds) Recent advancement in white biotechnology through fungi, Volume 2: Perspective for Value-Added Products and Environments. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 1–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14846-1_1
Koutinas AA, Xu Y, Wang R, Webb C (2007) Polyhydroxybutyrate production from a novel feedstock derived from a wheat-based biorefinery. Enzyme Microb Technol 40(5):1035–1044
Kumar S, Sharma S, Thakur S, Mishra T, Negi P, Mishra S et al (2019) Bioprospecting of microbes for biohydrogen production: current status and future challenges. In: Molina G, Gupta VK, Singh BN, Gathergood N (eds) Bioprocessing for biomolecules production. Wiley, USA, pp 443–471
Kuyper M, Harhangi H, Stave A, Winkler A, Jetten M, Delaat W, Denridder J, Opdencamp H, Vandijken J, Pronk J (2003) High-level functional expression of a fungal xylose isomerase: the key to efficient ethanolic fermentation of xylose by? FEMS Yeast Res 4:69–78
Lange L (2017) Fungal enzymes and yeasts for conversion of plant biomass to bioenergy and high‐value products. In: The Fungal Kingdom, pp 1027–1048
Lee SJ, Song H, Lee SY (2006) Genome-based metabolic engineering of mannheimia succiniciproducens for succinic acid production. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:1939–1948
Liu H, Valdehuesa KNG, Nisola GM, Ramos KRM, Chung W-J (2012) High yield production of D-xylonic acid from D-xylose using engineered Escherichia coli. Bioresour Technol 115:244–248
Liu HJ, Xu YZ, Zheng ZM, Liu DH (2010) 1,3-Propanediol and its copolymers: research, development and industrialization. Biotechnol J 5:1137–1148
Liu ZL, Slininger PJ, Dien BS, Berhow MA, Kurtzman CP, Gorsich SW (2004) 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 31:345–352
Liu HJ, Zhang DJ, Xu YH, Mu Y, Sun YQ, Xiu ZL (2007) Microbial production of 1, 3-propanediol from glycerol by Klebsiella pneumoniae under micro-aerobic conditions up to a pilot scale. Biotechnol Lett 29(8):1281–1285
Mazumdar S, Clomburg JM, Gonzalez R (2010) Escherichia coli strains engineered for homofermentative production of D-lactic acid from glycerol. Appl Environ Microbiol 76:4327–4336
Menon V, Rao M (2012) Trends in bioconversion of lignocellulose: biofuels, platform chemicals & biorefinery concept. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38(4): 522–550
Mojzita D, Wiebe M, Hilditch S, Boer H, Penttilä M, Richard P (2010) Metabolic engineering of fungal strains for conversion of D-galacturonate to meso-galactarate. Appl Environ Microbiol 76:169–175
Mussatto SI, Dragone G, Guimarães PM, Silva JPA, Carneiro LM, Roberto IC, Teixeira JA (2010) Technological trends, global market, and challenges of bio-ethanol production. Biotechnol Adv 28(6): 817–830
Nikel PI, Pettinari MJ, Galvagno MA, Mendez BS (2008) Poly(3 hydroxybutyrate) synthesis from glycerol by a recombinan Escherichia coli arcA mutant in fed-batch microaerobic cultures. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 77:1337–1343
Nissen TL, Kielland-Brandt MC, Nielsen J, Villadsen J (2000) Optimization of ethanol production in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by metabolic engineering of the ammonium assimilation. Metab Eng 2:69–77
Nygård Y, Toivari MH, Penttilä M, Ruohonen L, Wiebe MG (2011) Bioconversion of D-xylose to D-xylonate with Kluyveromyces lactis. Metab Eng 13:383–391
O’Connor D (2011) Report T39-T3. Biodiesel GHG emissions, pas, present, and future. A report to IEA Bioenergy Task 39. In: Commercializing liquid biofuels from biomass.: International Energy Agency (IEA); www.ieabioenergy.com/Liblinks.aspx
Okano K, Zhang Q, Shinkawa S, Yoshida S, Tanaka T, Fukuda H, Kondo A (2009) Efficient production of optically pure D-lactic acid from raw corn starch by using a genetically modified L-lactate dehydrogenase gene-deficient and alpha-amylase-secreting Lactobacillus plantarum strain. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:462–467
Pandey A, Soccol CR, Mitchell D (2000) New developments in solid state fermentation: I-bioprocesses and products. Process Biochem 35(10):1153–1169
Papanikolaou S, Fakas S, Fick M, Chevalot I, Galiotou-Panayotou M, Komaitis M, Marc I, Aggelis G (2008) Biotechnological valorisation of raw glycerol discharged after bio-diesel (fatty acid methyl esters) manufacturing process: production of 1,3-propanediol, citric acid and single cell oil. Biomass Bioenerg 32:60–71
Petrov K, Petrova P (2009) High production of 2, 3-butanediol from glycerol by Klebsiella pneumoniae G31. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 84(4):659–665
Rahardjo YS, Tramper J, Rinzema A (2006) Modeling conversion and transport phenomena in solid-state fermentation: a review and perspectives. Biotechnol Adv 24(2):161–179
Rastegari AA, Yadav AN, Yadav N (2020) New and future developments in microbial biotechnology and bioengineering: Trends of microbial biotechnology for sustainable agriculture and biomedicine systems: diversity and functional perspectives. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Rastegari AA, Yadav AN, Gupta A (2019a) Prospects of renewable bioprocessing in future energy systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham
Rastegari AA, Yadav AN, Yadav N (2019b) Genetic manipulation of secondary metabolites producers. In: Gupta VK, Pandey A (eds) New and future developments in microbial biotechnology and bioengineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63504-4.00002-5
Rastegari AA, Yadav AN, Yadav N, Tataei Sarshari N (2019c) Bioengineering of secondary metabolites. In: Gupta VK, Pandey A (eds) New and future developments in microbial biotechnology and bioengineering. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63504-4.00004-9
Rymowicz W, Fatykhova AR, Kamzolova SV, Rywinska A, Morgunov IG (2010) Citric acid production from glycerol-containing waste of biodiesel industry by Yarrowia lipolytica in batch, repeated batch, and cell recycle regimes. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87:971–979
Rymowicz W, Rywinska A, Marcinkiewicz M (2009) High-yield production of erythritol from raw glycerol in fed-batch cultures of Yarrowia lipolytica. Biotechnol Lett 31:377–380
Steen EJ, Chan R, Prasad N, Myers S, Petzold CJ, Redding A, Ouellet M, Keasling JD (2008) Metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for the production of n-butanol. Microb Cell Fact 7:36
Steen EJ, Kang Y, Bokinsky G, Hu Z, Schirmer A, McClure A, Del Cardayre SB, Keasling JD (2010) Microbial production of fatty-acid-derived fuels and chemicals from plant biomass. Nature 463:559–562
Syu MJ (2001) Biological production of 2,3-butanediol. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 55:10–18
Taconi KA, Venkataramanan KP, Johnson DT (2009) Growth and solvent production by Clostridium pasteurianum ATCC (R) 6013 (TM) utilizing biodiesel-derived crude glycerol as the sole carbon source. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 28:100–110
Tang X, Tan Y, Zhu H, Zhao K, Shen W (2009a) Microbial conversion of glycerol to 1,3-propanediol by an engineered strain of Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:1628–1634
Tang XM, Tan YS, Zhu H, Zhao K, Shen W (2009b) Microbial conversion of glycerol to 1,3-Propanediol by an engineered strain of Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microb 75:1628–1634
Toivari MH, Ruohonen L, Richard P, Penttilä M, Wiebe MG (2010) Saccharomyces cerevisiae engineered to produce D-xylonate. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 88:751–760
Vijayendran B (2010) Bio products from bio refineries-trends, challenges and opportunities. J Bus Chem 7(3)
Viniegra-Gonzàlez G (1997) Solid state fermentation: definition, characteristics, limitations and monitoring. In: Advances in solid state fermentation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 5–22
Wang X, Miller EN, Yomano LP, Zhang X, Shanmugam KT, Ingram LO (2011) Increased furfural tolerance due to overexpression of NADH-dependent oxidoreductase FucO in Escherichia coli strains engineered for the production of ethanol and lactate. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:5132–5140
Werpy T, Petersen G, Aden A, Bozell J (2004) Top value added chemicals from biomass. Volume 1-Results of screening for potential candidates from sugars and synthesis gas
Xu YZ, Guo NN, Zheng ZM, Ou XJ, Liu HJ, Liu DH (2009) Metabolism in 1,3- propanediol fed-batch fermentation by a D-lactate deficient mutant of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Biotechnol Bioeng 104:965–972
Yadav AN, Kumar R, Kumar S, Kumar V, Sugitha T, Singh B et al (2017) Beneficial microbiomes: biodiversity and potential biotechnological applications for sustainable agriculture and human health. J Appl Biol Biotechnol 5:45–57
Yadav AN, Rastegari AA, Yadav N (2020) Microbiomes of extreme environments: biodiversity and biotechnological applications. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, USA
Yadav AN, Singh S, Mishra S, Gupta A (2019) Recent advancement in white biotechnology through fungi. In: Perspective for value-added products and environments, vol 2. Springer International Publishing, Cham
Yazdani SS, Gonzalez R (2007) Anaerobic fermentation of glycerol: a path to economic viability for the biofuels industry. Curr Opin Biotech 18:213–219
Yomano LP, York SW, Shanmugam KT, Ingram LO (2009) Deletion of methylglyoxal synthase gene (mgsA) increased sugar co-metabolism in ethanol-producing Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Lett 31:1389–1398
Yuzbashev TV, Yuzbasheva EY, Sobolevskaya TI, Laptev IA, Vybornaya TV, Larina AS, Matsui K, Fukui K, Sineoky SP (2010) Production of succinic acid at low pH by a recombinant strain of the aerobic yeast Yarrowia lipolytica. Biotechnol Bioeng 107:673–682
Zhang Y-HP (2011) What is vital (and not vital) to advance economically competitive biofuels production. Process Biochem 46(11):2091–2110
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Director, DEI, for his continuous support and encouragement. SM is grateful to Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Deemed University, Agra, for sanctioning the Research Project, DEI/Minor Project/2017-18 (iv), as a start-up grant. DG is thankful to DST-INSPIRE for providing the fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Goyal, D., Mishra, S., Dantu, P.K. (2020). Microbial Technologies for Biorefineries: Current Research and Future Applications. In: Yadav, A.N., Rastegari, A.A., Yadav, N., Gaur, R. (eds) Biofuels Production – Sustainability and Advances in Microbial Bioresources. Biofuel and Biorefinery Technologies, vol 11. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53933-7_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53933-7_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-53932-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-53933-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)