Increased tolerance and conversion of inhibitors in lignocellulosic hydrolysates by Saccharomyces cerevisiae

During hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass, monomeric sugars and a broad range of inhibitory compounds are formed and released. These inhibitors, which can be organized around three main groups, furans, weak acids and phenolics, reduce ethanol yield and productivity by affecting the microorganism performance during the fermentation step. Among the microorganisms that have been evaluated for lignocellulosic hydrolysate ethanol fermentation, the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae appears to be the least sensitive. In order to overcome the effect of inhibitors, strategies that include improvement of natural tolerance of microorganism and use of fermentation control strategies have been developed. An overview of the origin, effects and mechanisms of action of known inhibitors on S. cerevisiae is given. Fermentation control strategies as well as metabolic, genetic and evolutionary engineering strategies to obtain S. cerevisiae strains with improved tolerance are discussed.

[1]  S. Mansfield,et al.  Tolerance and adaptation of ethanologenic yeasts to lignocellulosic inhibitory compounds , 2006, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[2]  Mohammad J. Taherzadeh,et al.  Inhibition effects of furfural on alcohol dehydrogenase, aldehyde dehydrogenase and pyruvate dehydrogenase , 2002 .

[3]  Enhanced biotransformation of furfural and hydroxymethylfurfural by newly developed ethanologenic yeast strains , 2005 .

[4]  J. A. Thomas,et al.  A review of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) in parenteral solutions. , 1984, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[5]  Mohammad J. Taherzadeh,et al.  Effects of Furfural on the Respiratory Metabolism of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in Glucose-Limited Chemostats , 2003, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[6]  N. Meinander,et al.  Main and interaction effects of acetic acid, furfural, and p-hydroxybenzoic acid on growth and ethanol productivity of yeasts. , 1999, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[7]  Bärbel Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: inhibition and detoxification , 2000 .

[8]  M. Berhow,et al.  Adaptive response of yeasts to furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and new chemical evidence for HMF conversion to 2,5-bis-hydroxymethylfuran , 2004, Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[9]  Lisbeth Olsson,et al.  Fermentative performance of bacteria and yeasts in lignocellulose hydrolysates , 1993 .

[10]  U. Sauer.  Evolutionary engineering of industrially important microbial phenotypes. , 2001, Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology.

[11]  Charlotte Schubert,et al.  Can biofuels finally take center stage? , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[12]  L. Olsson,et al.  Potential inhibitors from wet oxidation of wheat straw and their effect on ethanol production of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: wet oxidation and fermentation by yeast. , 2003, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[13]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  The fermentation performance of nine strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in batch and fed-batch cultures in dilute-acid wood hydrolysate. , 2004, Journal of bioscience and bioengineering.

[14]  M. Taherzadeh,et al.  On-line control of fed-batch fermentation of dilute-acid hydrolyzates. , 2000, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[15]  Mohammad J Taherzadeh,et al.  Ethanol production from glucose and dilute-acid hydrolyzates by encapsulated S. cerevisiae. , 2005, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[16]  L. Gorton,et al.  Limits for alkaline detoxification of dilute-acid lignocellulose hydrolysates. , 2003 .

[17]  Bärbel Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Furfural, 5-hydroxymethyl furfural, and acetoin act as external electron acceptors during anaerobic fermentation of xylose in recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 2002, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[18]  B. Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Detoxification of wood hydrolysates with laccase and peroxidase from the white-rot fungus Trametes versicolor , 1998, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[19]  L. Ingram,et al.  Effect of selected aldehydes on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli. , 1999, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[20]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Inhibition effects of furfural on aerobic batch cultivation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae growing on ethanol and/or acetic acid. , 2000, Journal of bioscience and bioengineering.

[21]  J. Russell,et al.  Another explanation for the toxicity of fermentation acids at low pH: anion accumulation versus uncoupling , 1992 .

[22]  C. Romming,et al.  Formation of Aromatic Compounds from Carbohydrates. Part III. Reaction of D-Glucose and D-Fructose in Slightly Acidic, Aqueous Solution. , 1976 .

[23]  Ye Sun,et al.  Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. , 2002, Bioresource technology.

[24]  M. Loureiro-Dias,et al.  Combined effect of acetic acid, pH and ethanol on intracellular pH of fermenting yeast , 1989, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[25]  Leif J. Jönsson,et al.  Influence of lignocellulose-derived aromatic compounds on oxygen-limited growth and ethanolic fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2000, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[26]  M. Taherzadeh,et al.  Use of dynamic step response for control of fed-batch conversion of lignocellulosic hydrolyzates to ethanol. , 2001, Journal of biotechnology.

[27]  L. Jönsson,et al.  Comparison of the resistance of industrial and laboratory strains of Saccharomyces and Zygosaccharomyces to lignocellulose-derived fermentation inhibitors , 2003 .

[28]  M. Taherzadeh,et al.  Continuous cultivation of dilute-acid hydrolysates to ethanol by immobilized Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2001, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[29]  L. Jönsson,et al.  Effect of overexpression of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Pad1p on the resistance to phenylacrylic acids and lignocellulose hydrolysates under aerobic and oxygen-limited conditions , 2001, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[30]  L. Olsson,et al.  Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates for ethanol production. , 1996 .

[31]  W. A. Scheffers,et al.  Effect of benzoic acid on metabolic fluxes in yeasts: A continuous‐culture study on the regulation of respiration and alcoholic fermentation , 1992, Yeast.

[32]  C. Verduyn.  Physiology of yeasts in relation to biomass yields , 1991, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek.

[33]  M. Taherzadeh,et al.  On-line estimation of sugar concentration for control of fed-batch fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolyzates by Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2002, Bioprocess and biosystems engineering.

[34]  R. C. Weast.  Handbook of chemistry and physics , 1973 .

[35]  M. Galbe,et al.  Controlled fed-batch fermentations of dilute-acid hydrolysate in pilot development unit scale , 2004, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[36]  H. Blanch,et al.  By‐product inhibition effects on ethanolic fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 1983, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[37]  Lonnie O. Ingram,et al.  Effect of organic acids on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli LY01. , 1999 .

[38]  H. Heipieper,et al.  Mechanisms of resistance of whole cells to toxic organic solvents , 1994 .

[39]  C. Rivard,et al.  Measurement of the inhibitory potential and detoxification of biomass pretreatment hydrolysate for ethanol production , 1996 .

[40]  B. Dien,et al.  Tolerance to furfural-induced stress is associated with pentose phosphate pathway genes ZWF1, GND1, RPE1, and TKL1 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2006, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[41]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Physiological effects of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural on Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2000, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[42]  B. Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  A 5‐hydroxymethyl furfural reducing enzyme encoded by the Saccharomyces cerevisiae ADH6 gene conveys HMF tolerance , 2006, Yeast.

[43]  Tomas Brandberg,et al.  Continuous Fermentation of Undetoxified Dilute Acid Lignocellulose Hydrolysate by Saccharomycescerevisiae ATCC 96581 Using Cell Recirculation , 2008, Biotechnology progress.

[44]  Rakesh Bhatnagar,et al.  Inhibition of glycolysis by furfural in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 1981, European journal of applied microbiology and biotechnology.

[45]  Leif J. Jönsson,et al.  Comparison of different methods for the detoxification of lignocellulose hydrolyzates of spruce , 1999 .

[46]  C. Lamb,et al.  PAD1 encodes phenylacrylic acid decarboxylase which confers resistance to cinnamic acid in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 1994, Gene.

[47]  P. L. Rogers,et al.  Kinetics of alcohol production by zymomonas mobilis at high sugar concentrations , 1979, Biotechnology Letters.

[48]  B. Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Isolation and characterization of acetic acid-tolerant galactose-fermenting strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae from a spent sulfite liquor fermentation plant , 1992, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[49]  A. Goodey,et al.  Genetic and Biochemical Analysis of the Ability of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to Decarboxylate Cinnamic Acids , 1982 .

[50]  G. Zacchi,et al.  A comparison between batch and fed-batch simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam pretreated spruce , 2005 .

[51]  Guido Zacchi,et al.  Cost Analysis of Ethanol Production from Willow Using Recombinant Escherichia coli , 1994, Biotechnology progress.

[52]  Lisbeth Olsson,et al.  Effect of compounds released during pretreatment of wheat straw on microbial growth and enzymatic hydrolysis rates , 2007, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[53]  Andrew P. Dunlop,et al.  Furfural Formation and Behavior , 1948 .

[54]  O. Carmel-Harel,et al.  Roles of the glutathione- and thioredoxin-dependent reduction systems in the Escherichia coli and saccharomyces cerevisiae responses to oxidative stress. , 2000, Annual review of microbiology.

[55]  G. Zacchi,et al.  The generation of fermentation inhibitors during dilute acid hydrolysis of softwood , 1999 .

[56]  B. Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Cofactor Dependence in Furan Reduction by Saccharomyces cerevisiae in Fermentation of Acid-Hydrolyzed Lignocellulose , 2005, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[57]  L. Jönsson,et al.  Development of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae Strain with Enhanced Resistance to Phenolic Fermentation Inhibitors in Lignocellulose Hydrolysates by Heterologous Expression of Laccase , 2001, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[58]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Conversion of furfural in aerobic and anaerobic batch fermentation of glucose by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. , 1999, Journal of bioscience and bioengineering.

[59]  J S Almeida,et al.  Influence of furfural on anaerobic glycolytic kinetics of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in batch culture. , 1999, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[60]  H. Terada,et al.  Uncouplers of oxidative phosphorylation. , 1990, Environmental health perspectives.

[61]  B. Ahring,et al.  Inhibition of ethanol-producing yeast and bacteria by degradation products produced during pre-treatment of biomass , 2004, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[62]  J. Pérez,et al.  Biodegradation and biological treatments of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin: an overview , 2002, International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology.

[63]  R. C. Weast.  CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics , 1973 .

[64]  Bärbel Hahn-Hägerdal,et al.  Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. , 2000 .

[65]  M. Galbe,et al.  Fuel ethanol production from steam-pretreated corn stover using SSF at higher dry matter content , 2006 .

[66]  J. A. Roels,et al.  Energetics and Kinetics in Biotechnology , 1983 .

[67]  U. Sauer,et al.  Fermentation performance of engineered and evolved xylose‐fermenting Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains , 2004, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[68]  A Martinez,et al.  Effect of alcohol compounds found in hemicellulose hydrolysate on the growth and fermentation of ethanologenic Escherichia coli , 2000, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[69]  P. Piper,et al.  Weak organic acid stress inhibits aromatic amino acid uptake by yeast, causing a strong influence of amino acid auxotrophies on the phenotypes of membrane transporter mutants. , 2003, European journal of biochemistry.