an open access journal production of bio-ethanol from · pdf filebeing generated by ethyl...

Thouseef Ahamad et al. 2016, Volume 4 Issue 1 ISSN (Online): 2348-4098 ISSN (Print): 2395-4752

International Journal of Science,Engineering and Technology

An Open Access Journal

© 2016 Thouseef Ahamad et al. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

Production of Bio-Ethanol from Some Less Edible Fruit Resources in Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation Process followed by Characterization through GC– MS Analysis 1Thouseef Ahamad, M. Y., 2G. Panduranga Murthy

Abstract

The present study deals with the production of bio-ethanol from less edible fruit resources like, Kokum Garcinia indica) and Butter fruit (Persea americana) samples by saccharification along with microbial fermentation technology. The microbial strain, Saccharomyces cerevisiae in flocculated conditions was used in the fermentation process and sugar content was analyzed before and after fermentation by standard the methods. The result showed that, the sugar content was more before fermentation (Garcinia indica 28mg/mL and Persea americana 35 mg/mL,) when compared to the post fermentation conditions (Garcinia indica 16mg/mL and Persea americana 18mg/mL). The production of bio-ethanol was accomplished at significant level in both fruit materials. In assessment, the bio-ethanol content from Garcinia indica (13%) was found to be noteworthy compared to Persea americana (11%) which was calculated by distillation method. In addition, the optimized rate of ethanol production through fermentation in Kokum fruit materials by Saccharomyces cerevisiae yields was found to be very high at pH ranges between 5.5-6.0 with the temperature of 30°C. The specific gravity for both Kokum fruit (1.446) and Butter fruit (1.225) was determined. Further, the fermentation was carried-out for 7 days both in Kokum and Butter fruit resources and the ethanol content was calculated for every 24 hours till 7 days. The optimum pH (5.5-6) and temperature (30°C) triggered the fermentation of both fruit resources. The optimum values were found to be significant for Kokum fruit (6.5%) and Butter fruit (6%) at Aspergillus niger. Whereas, in case of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the optimum pH and temperature for the fermentation of Kokum fruit sample was found to be 6.7 and 30°C and 5.8 and 30°C in Butter fruit was noticed. In both fruit samples, maximum ethanol production was completely achieved on 4, 5, 6 & 7 days respectively. Later, the addition of nitrogen sources had an impact on the growth of the organism and supported enzymatic hydrolysis to degrade complex sugars to simple sugars, which can facilitate Bio-ethanol production at optimal level. Besides, urea, ammonium nitrate and Sodium nitrate were proved to be the best nitrogen sources at different concentrations to support enzymatic hydrolysis of both fruit substrates. These fruit resources can be exploited for the production of ethanol as both fruit cultivars are put in order under less edible fruit category, moreover these fruit cultivars are also abundantly available in the project area. Later, the GC analysis showed that, the fruit samples evaluated for the yield of ethanol, Garcinia indica fruit juice gave 100% purity of ethanol as compared to standard. The obtained results of this study suggest that, the materials of both fruits contain significant amount of fermentable sugar which can be converted to bio-ethanol that can serve as one of the paramount alternative energy sources in the present scenario. Keywords: Bio-fuel, Fruit cultivars, Kokum fruit, Butter fruit, Yeast, Fermentation, Bio-ethanol.

260

Thouseef Ahamad et al. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 2016, Volume 4 Issue 1 ISSN (Online): 2348-4098 , ISSN (Print): 2395-4752

Introduction

In the last few decades, the increasing energy requirements along with the need to face the consequences of climate change have driven the search for renewable energy sources, in order to replace as much as possible the use of fossil fuels. The main natural energy resources for example fossil fuel petroleum and coal are being utilized at a rapid rate and these resources have been estimated to last only a few years. Therefore, alternative energy sources such as ethanol, methane and hydrogen are being considered to meet the requirements of the country (Lin and Tanaka, 2006; Amigun et al, 2008; Jayanathan et al, 2009; Hadeel, 2011). Some biological processes have rendered possible routes for producing ethanol and methane in large quantities. A world-wide interest in the utilization of bio-ethanol as an energy source has stimulated studies on the cost and efficiency of industrial processes for ethanol production mainly to facilitate Automobile industries apart from other utility sectors (Demirbas, 2008; Najafi et al, 2009; Goh and Lee, 2010; Turner et al, 2011).

Biomass including forest residues, agricultural wastes together with wood, herbaceous plants, crops as well as fruit resources is potentially emerged as huge establishment for Bio-energy. Besides, Ethanol fermented from renewable sources for fuel or fuel additives is known as bio-ethanol. The biofuel like, bioethanol, unlike petroleum, is a form of renewable energy source that can be produced from agricultural feed-stocks. The first generation of ethanol production used corn as a substrate, later corn was considered as a feedstock lead to the second generation of production of ethanol which used microorganisms and different wastes as substrates (Diwanya et al, 1992; Hammond et al, 1996; Essien et al, 2005; Balat and Balat, ,2009; Galbe and Zacchi, 2012; Janani et al, 2013). Apart from all these sources, the diversity of non-edible and less edible fruits in India is available at large quantities in different biodiversity locations. Since bio-ethanol is being generated by ethyl alcohol fermentation of agricultural crops, most frequently corn, potatoes, sugar beet, sugar cane etc., the edible and non-edible categories of fruit cultivars are of great concern (Walker, 2011; Julius and Lena, 2013). Amongst fruit sources, the Kokum fruit (Garcinia indica) and Butter fruits (Persea americana) are produced in large scale annually at certain specific

diversity regions and are vastly underutilized. In addition, the Fruit samples as per the statistics are also excellent sources of cellulose which can be used for the production of ethanol via saccharification followed by fermentation (Fatma and Fadel, 2010 and Suhas et. al, 2013; Shilpa et al, 2013; Alemayehu Gashaw et al, 2014; Hari Shankar et al, 2014).

Garcinia indica, a plant in the mangosteen family (Clusiaceae), commonly known as kokum, is a fruit-bearing tree that has culinary, pharmaceutical, and industrial uses. The genus Garcinia, belonging to the family ‘Clusiaceae’, includes about 200 species found in the Old World tropics, mostly in both Asia and Africa. Garcinia indica is indigenous to the Western Ghats region of India located along the western coast of the country which is found in forest lands, river-sides and wastelands respectively. These plants prefer evergreen forests, but sometimes they also thrive in areas with relatively low rainfall. It is also cultivated on a small scale and does not require irrigation and spraying of pesticides or fertilizers. Kokum squash or kokum concentrate is used in preparing a drink (sherbet) which is bright red in colour. The seed of Garcinia indica contains 23–26% oil, which remains solid at room temperature.

Butter fruit in Kannada is "benne hannu." Commonly called ‘the Avocado’ or Persea americana is a tree native to Mexico and Central America, classified in the flowering plant family, ‘Lauraceae’. Avocados are referred to as "butter fruit" in several parts of India due to the butter-like consistency of its flesh. The Avocado or butter fruit is known for the large amounts of nutrition it provides. The fruit can be had cooked, raw, in a salad or just taken off its tree and eaten too, or may be used topically for skin and hair needs, it would give out a wide range of helpful benefits for most health ailments that we suffer from. Butter fruit is very rich with potassium as compared to banana fruit besides; the fruit is also a very good source for Vitamin E and B as well, which are imperative for the body’s needs in daily life.

However, many studies have initiated to produce bio-ethanol to run vehicles with the existing engine system and to generate electricity. The production processes only use energy from renewable sources and there is no net CO2 emission to the atmosphere, thus making ethanol an environmentally beneficial energy source. In addition, ethanol derived from fruits materials, peels and biomass are the only liquid transportation fuel that does not contribute to the

261


green house gas effect. This reduction of green house gas emission is the main advantage of utilizing fruit biomass conversion into ethanol (Alfenore et al., 2002; Kimand and Dale, 2004; Panjai et al, 2009; Janani et al, 2013). Hence, the present study was paying attention on production and characterization of bio-ethanol from the materials of Kokum and Butter fruit via saccharification by employing microbial fermentation technology.

(A) (B)

Figure 1 (A): Habitual view of Kokum Fruit (B): Habitual view of Butter fruit

(A) (B)

Figure 2 (A): Dissected view of Kokum Fruit; (B): Dissected view of Butter Fruit

Figure 3: Showing geographic location of study area in respect of Fruit plantation

Kodagu (Coorg), is one of the smallest districts in Karnataka (INDIA). Kodagu is configured with mountains, hillocks, valleys enriched with huge biodiversity components. Approximately 65% of Kodagu’s geographical area is under tree cover and it is also one of the densely forested districts of Karnataka, India. Kodagu is also regarded as hotspot of biodiversity within Western Ghats as it has diverse kinds of vegetation. Agriculture and Coffee cultivation are the developed sectors in Kodagu. The main crops are; cardamom, pepper, coffee, cinchona, ginger & paddy. Fruits such as limes, baddpulis, oranges, passion fruits, butter fruits, banana, pineapple, fig, gooseberry and sapotas are grown. Now, with the exception of orange, lime, and banana cultivation no other fruit is grown economically. As climate is considerably cool throughout the year, wine preparation is common in most of the household and many of them prepare wine in large quantity and sell it. The commonly prepared wines are of goose-berry, Kokum fruit, Butter fruit, grape, pineapple, passion fruit, lime, rice, Cashew apple, betel, ginger, fig, banana etc.

Juice industries of certain fruits, such as Kokum fruit, Butter fruit, passion fruit, grape, pineapple, Cashew apple are grown in almost all local territory of Coorg districts, generate large amounts of fruit materials (peels, flush and seeds) and their wastes from the crush of tons of fruit to obtain the juice. Thus, there is a great stipulate for the amount of Kokum fruit and Butter fruit materials that could be processed for bio-ethanol production.

However, utilization of these fruit materials in the production of bio-fuels would be of great environmental and economic benefit as it could reduce the burden on conventional sources of energy and also get rid of the wastes. In addition, Ethanol fuel has long been seen as a clean alternative fuel to petrol. Therefore, the present study has been initiated with a novel methodology on production of ethanol using materials of Kokum and Butter fruits which are extensively available at the study area, i.e., Coorg district, Karnataka, India.

Materials and Methods

The study was initiated with baseline survey at different regions of ‘Kodagu district‘(Karnataka),

262


India. During the survey, interaction was made with fruit growers and with many house-hold people who prepare wine and sell as family enterprise. Further, interaction was also extended with commercial wine vendors regarding the present scenario emphasizing on collection of fruit material, processing, preparation of wine and market value of these home-made wine varieties. The first hand information was gathered through semi structured questionnaire at different time intervals.

Collection of Fruit Materials

The fruit materials; Kokum fruit (Garcinia indica, L) and Butter fruit (Persea Americana, L) materials were used in this study were procured from the local fruit growers of Coorg district, Karnataka (INDIA) during the period; August, 2013 to October, 2014 in both pre and post-harvest seasons. The plantation of both Kokum fruit and Butter fruit is located along the eastern part in the rural region of Kodagu district (Fig-2). A local-wild variety of both Kokum fruit, red or purple and Butter fruit are green or pale green coloured respectively. The details of both fruit cultivars are briefed hereunder.

Kokum fruit

Kokum Fruits (Garcinia indica, L) are commonly grown in cold regions and Kokum fruits are abundantly grown in South American countries. The fruits are extensively grown in different regions of Coorg and Malnad Area of Karnataka. These fruits are also grown in Kodaikanal region of Tamil Nadu followed by Wayanad region of Kerala. Usually, Kokum fruits area red & purple coloured fruits are commonly available in Coorg region (Fig-1A & 2A).

Butter fruit

Butter fruits (Persea americana L.), are grown expansively in specific regions of Coorg district and followed by some parts of Malnad regions in Karnataka. The term butter fruit is due to butter like consistency of its flesh. The fruit specifically contains significant amount of nutritional constituents such as, potassium, vitamin-E & B apart from other health benefits (Fig-1B & 2B).

Processing and Extraction of Juice from Fruit cultivars

The ripe fruit samples were procured from athorized fruit growers at Coorg, Karnataka. The procured fruits

samples were washed under running tap water and distilled water followed by disinfected with 70% ethanol. The fruit samples were processed for extraction of juice; Kokum Fruit Juice (KFJ) and Butter Fruit Juice (BFJ) using suitable extraction unit. The whole fruits were cleaned individually and chopped (3-5cm), the fruit pieces were then compressed in a fruit processor with a separate pulp collector through filtration process. The fruits were peeled off and subjected for squashing using Mixer. The squashed fruits were filtered using white cloth. Further, the filtered squash was transferred to plastic barrel, to this, sugar syrup was added. Then, potassium Meta bi-sulphite and yeast culture was added. The barrels were kept at room temperature for about 14 days. The known amount (50g) of each sample was weighed and utilized as the substrate periodically. Concurrently, the extracted KFJ and BFJ were kept cold on ice followed by frozen condition and further was transferred for storage at −20∘C for subsequent use.

Isolation and culturing of Microorganisms

The soil samples were collected randomly from the soil profile (top layer-2 cm) at different regions. About 50 g of soils were collected from each site and put into plastic bags and brought to the laboratory for further examination. The collected soil samples were subjected for air-drying at room temperature (27±1°C) for 24 to 48 h. The air-dried soil samples were processed to remove stones, debries and plant residues present if any. The soil samples (100 mg of each) were transferred to labeled test tubes containing five milliliters of sterile saline (0.9% NaCl) (Knudsen et al., 1995; Araujo et al, 2011). In order to suppress bacterial growth, 30 mg/l of standard (streptomycin) antibiotic was added. The test tubes were vortex mixed until. 100 μl of each of the suspension was evenly spreaded on PDA plates by means of a spreader and incubated at 27±1°C. the mixed colonies were observed on the plates after 5 7 days. The pure culture of Aspergillus niger was obtained through streak plate method. It was then maintained on PDA slants at 4OC.

Meanwhile, the yeast strain, Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Bakers yeast) was obtained from the authorized sources (Azyme Technologies, Bengaluru). This Yeast was cultured on Yeast extract Peptone Dextrose (YPD) at 30˚C. The cultures were stored at 4oC and sub-cultured for every 30 days and the same was subjected for flocculation in order to elicit their

263


activation at the time of experiment. It was then maintained on PDA slants at 4OC.

Starch hydrolysis test of isolated strains of Aspergillus niger

A loop full inoculum from a pure culture was streaked on a sterile plate of starch agar. Then, the inoculated plate was incubated at 27°C for 5 to 7 days. To this, Iodine reagent was added to flood the growth. This confirms the positive result through presence of clear zone surrounding colonies and accounts for their ability to digest the starch and therefore, indicates presence of alpha-amylase.

Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation (SSF) of KFJ and BFJ resources

The fermentation for Ethanol was carried out in 1000 ml flasks containing 100ml juice prepared in association with distilled water. The flasks were then sterilized by autoclaving at 121°C for 30 min and 4% (v/v) inoculums of Aspergillus niger and 3% (w/v) and inoculum of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was added. The fermentation was done for 7 days and the ethanol content was measured every 24 hours.

Evaluation of pH, Moisture, temperature and yeast inoculum on ethanol production

The fermentation of both fruit resources was carried out at different temperatures (20°C to 50°C) at pH 6 and at different pH (4 to 7) at 30°C. The optimum temperature and pH obtained during the course of investigation was used for fermentation at different yeast concentration 3% to 12%.

Physico-Chemical Characterization of Juice extracted from Fruit cultivars

The juices extracted from both fruit cultivars were subjected for physico-chemical parameters all-through the fermentation and the data has been represented in the form of tables, graphs respectively. Besides, the parameters such as reducing sugar, pH, temperature, effect of specific gravity, titration and concentration of ethanol were continuously monitored during the fermentation (Larissa et al, 2010).

Preparation of KFJ and BFJ for fermentation

KFJ and BFJ were prepared, prior to each fermentation by pretreatment followed by

centrifugation and sterilization. Pretreatment involved the addition of 1% (w/v) gelatin powder to the raw KFJ and BFJ and were maintained at 4oC for 24hrs. This was followed by centrifugation at 3500 rpm for 20min, to this, 2.5 g/L of ammonium sulphate was added and sterilized in conjunction with the fermentation vessel at 121oC for 15min (Osho, 2005).

Fermentation

Preparation of Yeast Inocula

The Yeast inoculums were prepared in sterilized yeast peptone dextrose (YPD) liquid broth. The composition of YPD in g/L was 10 g yeast extract powder, 20 g peptone powder and 20 g D-glucose was prepared. The culture conditions were as follows: (i) volume = 200mL, (ii) temperature = 30∘C, (iii) agitation = 150 rpm, and (iv) duration = 18 hrs. The yeast was activated by extracting the glycerol and re-suspending the pellet in 1mL of YPD broth and this suspension was added to 50mL of YPD liquid broth . The cell count was increased by sub-culturing followed by flocculation at 10% every 18 hrs from 50mL to 200mL. After cultivation, the cell viability was determined and 10% of the initial fermentation volume was used as a starter culture (Hang et al, 1986; Roukas, 1994; Panjai et al, 2009).

Saccharification and its knocking action

Saccharification is the critical step for bio-ethanol production where complex carbohydrates are converted to simple monomers. The enzymatic hydrolysis requires less energy and mild environment conditions as compared to acid hydrolysis. The previously processed fruit materials were added to a broth containing yeast extract (5g/l) and peptone (10g/l). The media was autoclaved at 1210C and 15 psi pressure for 20 min and the yeast culture was inoculated under aseptic conditions. The flasks were then incubated at room temperature for a period of 144 hrs (Jones et al, 1981; Laluce et al, 1984; El-Diwany et al, 1992; Linde et al, 2007).

Subsequent to saccharification, the cultures were autoclaved and filtered using Whatman filter paper No. 1. The filtrate was then transferred into 250ml Erlenmeyer flasks, made airtight with cork and autoclaved. The flasks were then aseptically inoculated with 15ml over night grown S. cerevisiae and incubated at room temperature for 96hrs.

264


Fermentation of Fruit Juice (both Kokum and Butter fruit) was performed with A BIOSTAT Bplus-2L-MO-O2 fermentor (Sartorius Stedim Systems GmBH, Germany) to produce bio-ethanol. The operating conditions of the batch fermentations are summarized in Table 2. The fermentation process was performed in duplicate. The ethanol produced was determined by Gas Chromatography (Bipolar, 1250 mV, 10 Samp) using a NUCON Gas Chromatograph (5765 EPC) with a flame ionization detector per second. The carrier gas used was Nitrogen.

Distillation

In the current study, the batch distillation method was adopted. The distillation unit consisted of three components: a re-boiler, condenser pipe and a distillate or receiving flask. The filtered samples was transferred into the re-boiler and heated to boil respectively. The vapors started to rise into the still head and passed through condenser pipe. The continuous circulation of cold water around the condenser pipe assisted in cooling the alcohol rich vapors back to liquid state. The condensed liquid enters the still receiver and then collected in the distillate. The distillate was tested for its alcohol content using Syke’s hydrometer. Simultaneously, the temperature of the distillate was also measured. The alcohol content and the temperature were used to find the percentage of ethyl alcohol (Et OH) of the distillate, referring to the distillation chart. It was found that the percentage of ethyl alcohol was in the range of 6 % – 8 % depending upon the various ranges of different parameters.

Effect of Nitrogen sources

Five different Nitrogen sources were selected for the study namely, ammonium nitrate, ammonium sulphate, urea, sodium nitrate and potassium nitrate. The different concentrations (0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5% and 2.0%) of each source were taken into flasks. To this, 5 g of fruit substrate was cut into small pieces and subjected for grinding. Then, the pulverized sample was added into flasks containing 50ml water with different concentrations of nitrogen sources - 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5% and 2.0%. The flasks were then autoclaved at 121 0C for 15 minutes at 15 psi. Once the flasks had cooled, they were inoculated with Yeast culture to facilitate fermentation to achieve bio-ethanol production (Suhas et al, 2013).

Reducing Sugar Assay

Ethanol fermentation is a biological process in which sugars are converted by microorganisms to produce ethanol and CO2. The microorganism most commonly used in fermentation process is the yeasts and, among the yeasts, Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the preferred choice for ethanol fermentation (Lin and Tanaka, 2006).

Reducing sugars assay was carried out according to the Di-nitrosalicylic method. Un-inoculated media was used as the control for the assay. The optical densities of the samples were measured against the blank at 540nm. The glucose concentration was then calculated using standard glucose curve.

Gas Chromatography (GC) Analysis

Using this technique, the content of ethanol concentration along with purity can be measured in the different samples. The analysis performed by a gas chromatograph is called gas chromatography which analyzes the compound that can be vaporized without decomposition and GC may also help in identifying a compound in the sample through spectra. In the study, GC technique has been adopted to analyze the concentration and the purity of ethanol in a given sample.

Generally chromatographic data is presented as a graph of detector response (y-axis) against retention time (x-axis), which is called a chromatogram. This provides a spectrum of peaks for a sample representing the analytes present in a sample eluting from the column at different times. The retention time can be used to identify analytes if the method conditions are constant. The pattern of peaks will be constant for a sample under constant conditions and can identify complex mixtures of analytes. However, in most modern applications, the GC is connected to a mass spectrometer or similar detector which is capable of identifying the analytes represented by the respective peaks.

Results and Discussion

The fruit cultivars; Kokum and Butter fruit materials were daily monitored. During the course of fermentation various parameters such as pH, temperature, specific gravity, alcohol concentration & titration was determined (Table-1&2). The results show that, the fermentation is considerably comparably fast in yeast as mentioned in the earlier

265


reports (Alfenore et. al, 2002; Panjai et. al, 2009 and Araujo et. al, 2011). The result also shown that; the production of ethanol is also significantly more in case of fermentation using flocculating yeast followed by Aspergillus niger. This is in accordance with the earlier reports made by Flávia Cristina dos Santos Lima et. al, 2012 and Evanie Devi Deenanath et. al, 2013.

Juice Preparation for Kokum fruit & Butter fruit samples

The juice yield was found to be significant in both Kokum and Butter fruits samples. From, 20 kg of KFJ (yielded 9.86 L) and BFJ (yielded 7.8L) yielded considerable amount of juice during extraction process. Previous to fermentation both KFJ and BFJ were thawed, centrifuged and pretreated with gelatin powder to remove some secondary metabolites. The preparation of KFJ and BFJ was essential as the clear juice with a minimal to zero suspended solids which will allow the yeast and A.niger to easily assimilate the sugars for growth and the production of ethanol (Table-1 & 2).

Physico-Chemical Characterization

The Juice extracted from Kokum and Butter fruits, all through the Fermentation process was subjected for physico-chemical characterization executed as per the standard protocols. The data has been represented in the tables respectively (Table-1 & 2). The obtained data on physico-chemical features indicated that, both fruit cultivars are potential resources for bioethanol production at large scale (Larissa et al, 2010).

Evaluation of pH, Moisture, temperature on ethanol production

Effect of pH on ethanol production

The ethanol production of inoculated samples was studied for 7 days regularly and the observations were recorded. The percentage of ethanol production from both kokum and butter fruit at 24 hours interval for seven days at different pH by Aspergillus niger, is indicated in table 2, 3 & 4 respectively. The variation in ethanol yield from both kokum and butter fruit with the change in pH (5 to 6) for seven days by Aspergillus niger was observed. The fungal strain, Aspergillus niger was found to be efficient and the yield was significantly superior (Table-3, 4, 5 & 6 and Graph-2). The optimum bio-

ethanol production was shown by Aspergillus niger strain at pH 5.5-6 with the temperature 30OC (Table-2 & Graph-2). The similar reports were also made by Mohamed and Reddy (1986) and the study reveals that, the ethanol production from potatoes by cultures of Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae was optimal in the pH range 5 to 6. Similarly, Neelakandan and Usharani (2009) has also reported that, the maximum ethanol yield from cashew apple juice using immobilized yeast cells by Saccharomyces cerevisiae was obtained at pH 6 followed by the reports of Shafaghat et al. (2010); Togarepi et al. (2010); Mark et al. (2007); Jannani et al. (2013); Ado et al. (2009); Shilpa et al. (2013). The obtained result is in concurrence with Thippareddy and Agrawal (2010) in which maximum ethanol was produced at pH 5.5 followed by pH 6 by using Aspergillus niger for hydrolysis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae for fermentation of agriculture waste (Akin et al, 2008; Ado et al, 2009).

Effect of Moisture on ethanol production

The Moisture content (%) of Kokum fruit 11.28 and Butter fruit 13.25 was noticed after pre-treatment of the substrates are represented in the Table-1. The presence significant moisture level could influence the accretion of sugar content during their ripening process (Linde et. al, 2006, 2007 & 2008; Anderson, 2008 and Rocha et. al, 2011).

Effect of temperature on ethanol production

The ethanol production of samples was studied for inoculated sample for 7 days recurrently and the changes were noticed. The percent ethanol production from both kokum and butter fruit samples at 24 hours interval for seven days at different temperatures by both Aspergillus niger strain and Saccharomyces cerevisiae were recorded respectively (Table-7,8 and 9,10). The differential expression in ethanol yield from both kokum and butter fruit by Aspergillus niger strains at 30ºC is indicated in the table 7& 8. Similarly, the variation in ethanol yield from both kokum and butter fruit by Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 30ºC is indicated in the table 9 & 10.

The disparity in ethanol yield from both kokum and butter fruit with variable temperature (20ºC to 50ºC) for seven days by both Aspergillus niger strain and Saccharomyces cerevisiae is represented table-7-10. The maximum ethanol production was noticed at

266


temperature 30ºC with 6.348% in kokum and 6.208% in Butterfruit in association with Aspergillus niger strain. In case of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the maximum ethanol was found to be 6.271% in kokum fruit and 5.534% in Butter fruit at 30ºC as compared to variable temperature systems where the deceased trend was observed respectively. This is in accordance with the earlier studies made by Hadeel et al. (2011) which was focused on the maximum ethanol production from rambutan fruit biomass using yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae was at temperature 30ºC.

Subsequently, Manikandan and Viruthagiri (2010) reported that, the ethanol derived from corn flour through Aspergillus niger and non starch-digesting with sugar-fermenting Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the optimum value of the temperature was found to be 30ºC. The obtained results in the study were similar to that the reports made by Kargi and Curme, (2004); Manikandan et al. (2008); Togarepi et al. (2010); Thippareddy and Agrawal (2010). In addition, Magdy et al. (2011); reported that temperature in the range of 25-30°C was found to be favourable and facilitate optimum production of ethanol for thermophilic S. cerevisiae strain in SSF of various substrates. Likewise, Jannani et al. (2013) also reported maximum ethanol production at temperature 30°C from banana waste by using Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Evaluation on Reducing Sugar

The Reducing sugar in terms of percentage was analyzed and the result reveals; 0.78% in Kokum fruit samples and 0.67% in Butter fruit sample was noticed (Table-1 and Graph-1). The yeast can grow both on simple sugars, such as glucose, and on the disaccharide sucrose. Furthermore, the availability of a robust genetic transformation system of S. cerevisiae along with a long history of this microorganism in industrial fermentation processes makes it most desired microorganisms for ethanol production (Osho, 2005; Honorato et. al, 2007 and Pachco et. al, 2010). S. cerevisiae has high resistance to ethanol, consumes significant amounts of substrate in adverse conditions, and shows high resistance to inhibitors present in the medium (Hector et. al, 2011 and Larissa Canilha et. al, 2012 and Evanie Devi Deenanath et. al, 2013).

Effect of Specific Gravity

When the fermentation starts, specific gravity decreases. Specific gravity of Kokum fruit reached 1.446 at 52 hours. Whereas, specific gravity of Butter fruit reached 1.225 for the stipulated time of period respectively (Table-1). After 14 days, it reached a constant value indicating the end of fermentation (Van Zyl et. al, 2007; Pinheiro et. al, 2008 and Evanie Devi Deenanath et. al, 2013).

Assessment on Titration

As the days increased fluctuating trend was seen in titration. The titratable acidity for Kokum fruit was 1.28g/L citric acid. In case of Butter fruit, it was 1.22 g/L citric acid on 14th day. (Mishra et. al, 2012 and Janani and Ketzi, 2013).

Concentration of ethanol and effect of Nitrogen sources

The ethanol content in the distillate was measured and the concentration of bio-ethanol in Kokum fruit sample was 13.4%, whereas the concentration of ethanol in Butter fruit was 11.3% (Table-11 and 12). This value is significantly superior as compared to the previous reports made by Neelakandan and Usharani, 2009; Araujo et. al, 2001; Mishra et. al, 2012 and Deenanath et. al, 2013.

All the nitrogen sources were utilized by the microbe for the growth and the organism showed substrate degradation maximum with ammonium nitrate, ammonium sulphate and sodium nitrate at 0.8% followed urea and ammonium phosphate at 2.5%. The degradation process was found to be positive at all the nitrogen sources. Ammonium nitrate proved to be the best source of nitrogen for the degradation of fruit substrate by Saccaromyces cerevisiae; where ammonium sulphate at 0.05% was found to be optimal nitrogen concentration.

Gas Chromatography (GC) Analysis

The function of the stationary phase in the column has separated ethanol, causing each one to exit the column at a different time (retention time). Other parameter that was used to alter the order or time of retention is the carrier gas flow rate, column length and the temperature. The purity of the carrier gas is also frequently determined by the detector, though the level of sensitivity needed can also play a significant role.

267


The spectrum of peaks for different samples representing the analytes present in the given samples eluting from the column at different times. 100% purity of bio-ethanol was noticed in Kokum Fruit samples executed with increased days of fermentation using flocculating yeast cultures (Table-13-17 & Graph-3-8). Among all the samples, sample

4 achieved 5.3% ethanol which gives 100% purity as compared to standard ethanol (Table-9 and Graph 4 & 6). Similar results were also obtained by El-Diwany et. al, 1992; Bellisimi and Ingledew, 2005; Najafi et. al, 2009; Fatima et al, 2010; Balasubramaniam et. al, 2011; Janani et al, 2013;).

Table 1: Physico-chemical characteristic features in Kokum and Butter fruits after pre-treatment process.

Table 2: Production of Bioethanol from Kokum and Butter fruits throughout the fermentation process using both Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

SL. No. Parameters analyzed Kokum fruit Juice (KFJ) Butter Fruit Juice (BFJ)

1. Fruit Small, circular & purple red color Large, cone shaped & green color

2. Juice yield (for 20kg sample) 9.86L 11.8L

3. pH 4.8—6.0 5.0-5.8

4. Moisture (%) 11.28±0.02 13.25±0.03

5. Soluble Solids (0Brix) 0.01±0.00 0.006±0.00

6. Reducing Sugar (%) 0.78±0.01 0.67±0.04

7. Specific Gravity 1.446 1.225

8. Alcohol Conc. (%) 7.0 6.6

9. Titratable Acidity (on 14th day) as Citric Acid (g/l)

1.28 1.22

10. Fermentation period Minimum 7 days & Maximum 14 days

SL.

No.

Fruit Resources Sugar content (g/l)

Ethanol production (%) pH range Temperature

( oC) iger

S. cerevisiae

1. Kokum Fruit 29 6.3 7.6 5.5-6 28-30

2. Butter fruit 35 5.9 6.8

268


Table 3: Ethanol production from Kokum Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different pH with Aspergillus niger at 30oC.

Ethanol Production (%)

pH/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 0.486 0.721 1.266 2.925 3.848 4.112 4.898

5 0.515 0.825 1.980 3.212 4.024 5.222 5.854

6 0.685 1.322 2.456 4.208 5.154 5.821 6.548

7 0.602 1.089 1.757 3.009 3.524 2.955 2.777

Table 4: Ethanol production from Butter Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different pH with Aspergillus niger at 30oC.


pH/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 0.415 0.625 0.976 1.565 3.089 3.868 4.264

5 0.435 0.745 1.755 2.585 3.760 4.677 5.126

6 0.515 1.118 1.462 3.666 4.545 5.444 5.946

7 0.466 0.945 1.428 3.225 3.345 3.878 4.116

Table 5: Ethanol production from Kokum Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different pH with Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 30oC.


pH/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 0.525 0.866 1.302 2.899 3.905 4.436 5.220

5 0.666 1.385 2.085 3.766 4.650 5.884 6.356

6 0.855 1.452 2.456 4.455 5.546 6.325 7.605

7 0.626 1.202 1.845 3.455 4.125 4.665 5.882

269


Table 6: Ethanol production from Butter Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different pH with Saccharomyces cerevisiae at 30oC.


pH/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 0.481 0.776 1.148 2.141 3.322 3.967 4.640

5 0.532 1.155 1.647 2.666 4.078 4.853 5.377

6 0.771 1.572 2.258 3.296 4.185 5.128 6.835

7 0.544 1.025 1.350 2.722 3.833 4.112 4.966

Table 7: Ethanol production from Kokum Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different temperature with Aspergillus niger at pH-6


Temp/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20 oC 0.386 0.489 0.965 1.266 1.788 2.633 2.566

30 oC 0.685 1.322 2.456 4.208 5.154 5.821 6.348

40 oC 0.544 0.808 1.875 3.556 4.242 4.444 5.232

50 oC 0.325 0.602 0.955 2.455 2.750 2.988 3.025

Table 8: Ethanol production from Butter Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different temperature with Aspergillus niger at pH-6


Temp/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20 oC 0.328 0.411 0.898 1.128 1.558 2.414 2.462

30 oC 0.608 1.105 2.185 4.084 4.685 5.366 6.208

40 oC 0.489 0.622 1.550 3.406 4.331 4.556 5.166

50 oC 0.288 0.542 0.799 2.260 2.552 2.606 3.225

270


Table 9: Ethanol production from Kokum Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different temperature with Saccharomyces cerevisiae at pH-6


Temp/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20 oC 0.435 0.506 1.372 2.221 2.564 3.085 3.595

30 oC 0.645 1.066 2.168 3.758 4.880 5.176 6.271

40 oC 0.509 0.736 1.885 3.307 4.542 4.776 5.426

50 oC 0.367 0.418 0.724 1.615 1.368 0.859 0.806

Table 10: Ethanol production from Butter Fruit resources at 24 hours interval for seven days at different temperature with Saccharomyces cerevisiae at pH-6


Temp/Days 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20 oC 0.348 0.434 1.158 1.779 2.046 2.356 2.974

30 oC 0.468 0.892 1.758 2.356 3.684 4.378 3.534

40 oC 0.391 0.647 1.524 2.258 2.085 2.270 1.466

50 oC 0.255 0.374 0.933 1.044 1.115 1.080 1.121

Table 11: Effect of different Nitrogen sources on the production of Bio-ethanol in Kokum Fruit resources by Aspergillus niger

SL. No.

Nitrogen source Total reducing sugar (g/l) Bio-Ethanol production (g/l)

A. niger S.cerevisiae A. niger S.cerevisiae

1. Urea 9.5 11.4 19.6 21.24

2. Ammonium nitrate 8.4 9.83 25.4 27.45

3. Sodium Nitrate 7.2 8.82 23.6 25.54

4. Ammonium sulphate 7.4 8.12 27.9 28.75

5. Ammonium phosphate 6.5 6.9 19.5 21.8

271


Table-12. Effect of different Nitrogen sources on the production in Butter Fruit resources of Bio-ethanol by Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Graph 1: Amount of reducing sugars produced with diverse fruit resources as substrates

Graph 2: Ethanol yield after fermentation using fruit substrates

SL. No. Nitrogen source Total reducing sugar(g/l) Bio-Ethanol production (g/l)

A. niger S.cerevisiae A. niger S.cerevisiae

1. Urea 5.7 8.7 17.22 18.8

2. Ammonium nitrate 6.2 7.4 19.41 22.4

3. Sodium Nitrate 5.2 6.6 18.54 21.6

4. Ammonium sulphate 5.4 7.1 21.25 24.5

5. Ammonium phosphate 6.2 5.8 22.5 26.4

272


Table 13: Showing GC Analysis of Kokum fruit Juice of after fermentation using Yeast

Graph 3: GC Analysis of fruit juice sample of Kokum fruit after fermentation using Yeast

Table 14: Showing GC Analysis of Kokum fruit Peel after fermentation using Yeast

273


Graph 4: GC Analysis of juice sample of Kokum fruit peel after fermentation using Yeast

Table 15: Showing GC Analysis of Butter fruit Juice of after fermentation using Yeast

Graph 5: GC Analysis of juice sample of Butter fruit after fermentation using Yeast

274


Table 16: Showing GC Analysis in Butter fruit peel sample of after fermentation using Yeast

Graph 6: GC Analysis in Peel of Butter fruit sample after fermentation using Yeast

Table 17: Showing GC Analysis in Standard sample.

275


Graph 7: Showing GC Analysis for standard sample (Ethanol).

Graph 8: Showing GC Analysis on lucidity of Ethanol Kokum and Butter fruit samples comparing with Standard sample.

Summary and Conclusion

Since the need of bio-ethanol has been increasing, the production of bioethanol must be increased using cheaper and eco-friendly raw materials. On the basis of these characteristics fruit wastes can be considered as cheaper and eco-friendly. Bio-ethanol is manufactured through a series of biochemical

reactions using hydrolysis to produce simple from various bio-resources like, sugar beet, wheat, corn, biomass, fruits of different cultivars and sugar cane in India and in other emerging countries (Mohamed et al, 1986; Magdy et al, 2011). The sugars extracted from fruit samples are then fermented to produce bio-ethanol. Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation has been found to efficiently remove

276


glucose, which is an inhibitor to cellulase activity, thus increasing the yield and rate of cellulose hydrolysis. It is interesting to note that even though, ethanol is produce from renewable resource, economic factors such as land availability, labour, taxation, utilities, crop processing costs and transportation are to be put into consideration otherwise there will be no profit for its production. Keeping that in view, the present of this study mainly suggest that, wastes from fruits resources that contain fermentable sugar should not be discarded into our environment, but should be converted to useful products like bio-ethanol which can serve as an alternative energy source

In future, alternative methods of fermentation technology could be used to derive ethanol from non-edible or less edible fruit materials apart from ligno-cellulosic materials like, wood, pulp, fibres, papers, agriculture and industrial residues and bio-wastes (Linde et al, 2007 & 2008). Currently, these processes are rather expensive and not yet competitive for market uptake. The present research study has clearly shown that, the process of simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of fruit resources like, kokum and butter fruits to obtain ethanol by a mixture of starch digesting fungus A. niger and non starch digesting sugar fermenter, S. cerevisiae is found to be most feasible. In addition, the hydrolysates resulted from saccharification of fruit substrates by S. cerevisiae were used for fermentation using Aspergillus niger and yeast culture respectively (Mark et al, 2007). The amount of ethanol content increased with the increase in fermentation time. The simultaneous fermentation of starch to ethanol can be conducted efficiently by using co-cultures of the amylolytic fungus Aspergillus niger and a non-amylolytic sugar fermenter, Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The optimized production of Bio-ethanol was achieved by microbial hydrolysis and fermentation process of fruit samples through supplementary factors (Brooks, 2008; Neelakandan and Usharani, 2009; Pacheco et al, 2010).

Further, optimization of bio-ethanol was achieved significantly from less utilized fruit resources like, Kokum and Butter fruit respectively. Besides, they are also found to be potential sources for the wine production which was confirmed through physic-chemical analysis after treatment (Alfenore et al, 2002 and Anderson, 2008; Ocloo, 2010). Apart from these, the potentiality and efficiency of optimized

production of ethanol in fruit samples using two different microorganisms with the similar parameters like moisture, pH, Temperature, Time and Incubations; the purity etc. have been justified.

Finally, the higher production of ethanol was observed in Kokum fruit sample than butter fruit samples by way of analysis on different physio-chemical parameters followed by saccharification processes. This could justify that; bio-ethanol production from fruit substrates by employing sequential fermentation can be established. The evaluation of ethanol production is most essential to quantify the process along with its absolute performance (Ueda, 1981; Ocloo and Ayernor, 2010).

The residual reducing sugars content decreased significantly after fermentation which indicates the ability of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to utilize available reducing sugars. The use of less utilized fruit samples is cheap, easily available and renewable source of energy (fermentable sugars) to produce ethanol via sustainable technologies promise with great future. The maximum ethanol yield from Kokum fruit at Aspergillus gave significant value of ethanol, similarly, in Butter fruit, the yield of ethanol was also found to be noteworthy. Besides, the results also show that, the bio-ethanol obtained in Kokum fruit is of highest purity and can be recommended to use as fuel ethanol.

Hence, the present studies demonstrate that, there is potential for use of these fruit samples in bio-ethanol production with minimal energy consumption to provide aeration. Furthermore, other than the yeast fermentation, the ethanol production using the culture of Aspergillus niger is most capable of high amount bio-ethanol recovery in the fruit samples with 100% purity. Hence, the result of this work has also shown that different fruit wastes can serve as raw material for the production of bio-ethanol. The search for alternative and renewable source of fuels especially for transportation has taking a centre stage across the world due to its eco-friendliness and environmental sustainability (Itelima et al, 2013; Ajay Kumar Singh et al, 2014). The use of bio-ethanol in internal combustion engines is an alternative to fossil fuels which are erstwhile non renewable and contributes to global warming due to the emission of green house gases (GHGs).Therefore the findings of this work suggest that, both Kokum and Butter fruit resources could be a good substrate for bio-ethanol production.

277


Acknowledgement

Sincere thanks to the Department of Botany & Biotechnology, Sri Siddaganga College of Arts, Commerce and Science for Women (Affiliated to Tumkur University, Karnataka), B.H. Road, Tumkur – 572 102, (Karnataka).The authors are also grateful to; Bhoomigeetha Institute of Research & development (BIRD), Tumkur (Karnataka), INDIA for providing infrastructure. Further, we wish to thank the Manager of Azyme Biotechnologies, Bengaluru for training and technical assistance with statistical analysis and the authorities of Bharathiar University, Coimbatore (Tamilnadu) for providing opportunity to pursue Research study.

References

1. Ado, S.A., Kachalla, G.U., Tijjani, M.B. and Aliyu, M. S. 2009. Ethanol production from corn cobs by cocultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Aspergillus niger. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 2(2): 99 - 101

2. Ajay Kumar Singh, Sanat Rath, Yashab Kumar, Harison Masih, Jyotsna K. Peter, Jane C. Benjamin, Pradeep Kumar Singh, Dipuraj, Pankaj Singh. 2014. Bio-Ethanol Production from Banana peel by Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation Process using co-cultures Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci; 3(5): 84-96.

3. Akin-Osanaiye, B.C., Nzelibe, H.C. and Agbaji, A.S. 2008. Ethanol production from Carica papaya(Pawpaw) fruit waste. Asian Journal of Biochemistry 3(3):188-193.

4. Alemayehu Gashaw. 2014. Bioethanol Production from Fruit Wastes and Factors affecting Its Fabrication, International Journal of Chemical and Natural Sciences; Vol. 2, No. 5: 132-140.

5. Alfenore, S., Molina-Jouve, C., Guillouet, S. E., Uribelarrea, J. L., Goma, G and Benbadis, L. 2002. “Improving ethanol production and viability of Saccharomyces cerevisiae by a vitamin feeding strategy during fed-batch process,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 60, no. 1-2, pp. 67–72, 2002.

6. Amigun, B., Sigamoney, R and von Blottnitz, H.2008. “Commercialisation of bio-fuel industry in Africa: a review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 690–711.

7. Anderson WF, Akin DE. 2008. Structural and chemical properties of grass lignocelluloses related to conversion for biofuels. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 35:355–366.

8. Araujo, S. M., Silva, C. F., Moreira, J.J., Narain S.N and Souza, R.R. 2011. “Biotechnological process for obtaining new fermented products from cashew apple fruit by

Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains,” Journal of Industrial Microbiology Biotechnology, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 1161–1169.

9. Balasubramaniam, K., Ambikapathy, V and Panneraselvam, A. 2011. “Studies on ethanol production from spoiled fruits by batch fermentations”. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology Research, Vol.1 (4), 158-163.

10. Balat, M.and Balat, H.2009. “Recent trends in global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel,” Applied Energy, vol. 86, no. 11, pp. 2273–2282.

11. Bellissimi, E. and Ingledew, W. M. 2005. “Metabolic acclimatization: preparing active dry yeast for fuel ethanol production,” Process Biochemistry, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 2205–2213.

12. Brooks, A.A. 2008. Ethanol production potential of local yeast strains isolated from ripe banana peels, African journal of Biotechnology, 7(20): 3749- 3752.

13. Deenanath, E. D., Iyuke, S. E. and Lindsay, D. 2010. “Enzymatic hydrolysis of bitter sorghum for bioethanol production,” Master Brewers Association of the Americas-MBAA TQ.

14. Demirbas, A. 2008. “Biofuels sources, biofuel policy, biofuel economy and global biofuel projections,” Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 2106–2116.

15. Diwanya, E. L. I., EL-Abyad, M.S., Refai, A.H.EL., Sallem, L.A., Allam, R.E. 1992. Effect of some fermentation on ethanol production from beet molasses by S. cerevisiae, Bioresource technology, 42: 191-195.

16. El-Diwany, A.I., El-Abyad, M. S., El-Refai, A.H., Sallam, L. A. and R. F.Allam, “Effect of some fermentation parameters on ethanol production from beet molasses by Saccharomyces cerevisiae Y-7,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 191–195, 1992.

17. Essien, J.P., Akpan, E.J., Essien, E.P. 2005. Studies on mould growth and biomass production using waste banana peels, Bioresource Technology, 19: 361-363.

18. Fatma HA, Fadel M 2010. Production of bio-ethanol via enzymatic saccharification of rice straw by cellulase produced by Trichoderma reesei under solid state fermentation. New York Sci J. 3: 72-78.

19. Galbe M, Zacchi G. 2012. A review of the production of ethanol from softwood. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 59:618–628.

20. Goh, C. S., and Lee, K. T. 2010. “A visionary and conceptual macroalgae- based third-generation bio-ethanol (TGB) bio-refinery in Sabah, Malaysia as an underlay for renewable and sustainable development,”

278


Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 842–848.

21. Hadeel, A., Hossain, A. B. M. S. Latifa, K., ALNaqeb, H. Abear, J. and AlHewiti , N. 2011. Bio-ethanol fuel production from rambutan fruit biomass as reducing agent of global warming and greenhouse gases. African Journal of Biotechnology. 10(50): 10157-10165.

22. Hammond, J.B., Egg, R., Diggins, D. and Coble, C.G. 1996. Alcohol from bananas. Bioresource Technology, 56 : 125 130.

23. Hang, Y.D., C.Y. Lee, E.E. Woodams .1986. Solid-state fermentation of grape pomace for ethanol production, Biotechnology Letter, 8: 53-56.

24. Hari Shankar Vishwakarma, Abhishek Kumar, Jyoti Singh, Shipra Dwivedi, Mahendra Kumar.2014. Production of Ethanol from Fruit Wastes by using Saccharomyces cerevisiae, International Journal of Renewable Energy Technology Research; Vol. 3(10):1-5.

25. Hector, R. E., Mertens, J. A., Bowman, M. J., Nichols, N. N., Cotta, M. A and Hughes, S.R. 2011. “Saccharomyces cerevisiae engineered for xylose metabolism requires gluconeogenesis and the oxidative branch of the pentose phosphate pathway for aerobic xylose assimilation,” Yeast, vol. 28, pp. 645–660.

26. Honorato, T. L., Rabelo, M. C., Gonc¸alves, L. R. B., Pinto, G. A. S. and Rodrigues, S.2007. “Fermentation of cashew apple juice to produce high added value products,” World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1409–1415.

27. Itelima, J., Onwuliri, F., Onwuliri,E., Isaac Onyimba and Oforji, S. 2013. Bio-Ethanol Production from Banana, Plantain and Pineapple Peels by Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation Process; International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4(2):213-2016.

28. Janani K., Ketzi M., Megavathi S., Vinothkumar D., Ramesh Babu N.G. 2013. Comparative studies of ethanol production from different Fruit Wastes using Saccharomyces cerevisiae; International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Sub section: Journal Engineering and Technology;2(12), 7161-7167.

29. Jegannathan, K. R., Chan, E. S. and P. Ravindra. 2009. “Harnessingbiofuels: a global Renaissance in energy production?” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 2163–2168.

30. Jones, R.P., Pamment, N and Greenfield, P.F. 1981. Alcohol fermentation by Yeast, The effect of environmental and other variables, Process Biochemistry, 16:42.

31. Joshi, S.S., Dhopeshwarkar, R., Jadav, U., Jadav, R.,D souza, L. and Jayaprakash, D. 2001.Continuous ethanol production by fermentation of waste banana peels using flocculating yeast. Indian Journal of Chemical Technology 40:B25.

32. Julius, E and Lena, T . 2013. “Cluster Development in Low Resource Settings: the Case of Bio-ethanol and Fruit Processing Clusters in Uganda”. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Vol. 2(3), 59-78.

33. Kargi, F. and J.A. Curme .2004. Solid state fermentation of sweet sorghum to ethanol in a rotary-drum fermentor, Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 27: 1122-1125

34. Kimand, S. Dale, B. E. 2004. “Global potential bio-ethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues,” Biomass and Bio-energy, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 361–375.

35. Laluce, C., and J. R. Mattoon. 1984 Development of rapidly fermenting strains of Saccharomyces diastaticus for direct conversion of starch and dextrins to ethanol. Applied Environmental Microbiology, 48 : 17- 25.

36. Larissa Canilha, Anuj Kumar Chandel, Thais Suzane dos Santos Milessi, Felipe Antonio Fernandes Antunes, Wagner Luiz da Costa Freitas, Maria das Grac¸as Almeida Felipe, and Silvio Silverio da Silva. 2010. Bioconversion of Sugarcane Biomass into Ethanol:An Overview about Composition, Pretreatment Methods, Detoxification of Hydrolysates, Enzymatic Saccharification, and Ethanol Fermentation. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology Volume (1): Pp-1-15.

37. Lin, Y and Tanaka, S. 2006. “Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and prospects,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 627–642.

38. Linde, M. Galbe, M and Zacchi, G. 2006. “Steam pretreatment of acid-sprayed and acid-soaked barley straw for production of ethanol,” Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, vol. 130, no. 1–3, pp. 546–562.

39. Linde, M. Galbe, M and Zacchi, G. 2007, “Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam-pretreated barley straw at low enzyme loadings and low yeast concentration,” Enzyme and Microbial Technology, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1100–1107.

40. Linde, M., Galbe, M and Zacchi, G.2008. “Bio-ethanol production fromnon-starch carbohydrate residues in process streams from a dry-mill ethanol plant,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 99, no. 14, pp. 6505–6511.

41. Magdy, M., Afifi, Abd El-Ghany T.M., Mohamed, A., Al Abboud, Taher M.,Taha, Khaled E. Ghaleb. 2011. Biorefinery of Industrial Potato Wastes to ethanol by Solid State

279


Fermentation, Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 7(1), 126-134.

42. Manikandan, K. and Viruthagiri, T. 2010. Kinetic and Optimization Studies on Ethanol Production from Corn Flour. International Journal of Chemical and Biological Engineering 3(2): 65-69.

43. Manikandan, K., Saravanan, V and Viruthagiri, T. 2008. Kinetic study on ethanol production from banana peelwaste using mutant strain of S. cerevisiae. Indian J. of Biotechnology. 7: 83-88

44. Mark, R.W., Grohmann, K., Wilbur, W. W. 2007. Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of citrus peel waste by Saccharomyces cerevisiae to produce ethanol", Process Biochemistry, Vol. 42: 1

45. Mishra, J., Kumar, D., Samanta, S and Manoj Kumar. 2012. “A comparative study of ethanol production from various agro residues by using Saccharomyces cerevisiae & Candida albicans”. Journal of Yeast and Fungal Research, Vol.3 (2), 12-17.

46. Mohamed, M. A, and Reddy, C.A. 1986. Direct fermentation of potato starch to ethanol by cocultures of Aspergillus niger and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1055-1059.

47. Najafi, G., Ghobadian, B., Tavakoli, T. and Yusaf, T.2009. “Potential of bio-ethanol production from agricultural wastes in Iran,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, no. 6-7, pp. 1418–1427.

48. Neelakandan, T and Usharani, G. 2009. “Optimization and production of bioethanol from cashew apple juice using immobilized yeast cells by Saccharomyces cerevisiae,” America-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 85–88.

49. Neelakandan, T. and Usharani, G. 2009. Optimization and Production of Bio-ethanol from Cashew Apple Juice Using Immobilized Yeast Cells by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. American- Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research 4 (2): 85-88.

50. Ocloo, F. C. K. and Ayernor, G. S. 2010. Production of alcohol from cassava flour hydrolysate. Journal of Brewing and Distilling. 1(2):15-21.

51. Osho, “Ethanol and sugar tolerance of wine yeasts isolated from fermenting cashew apple juice,” African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 660–662, 2005.

52. Pacheco, A.M.,. Gondim, D. R and Goncalves, L. R. B. 2010. “Ethanol production by fermentation using immobilized yeast cells,” Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, vol. 161, no. 1–8, pp. 209–217.

53. Panjai, L., Ongthip, K and Chomsri, N. 2009. “Complex fruit wine produced from dual culture fermentation of pineapple juice with Torulaspora delbrueckii and Saccharomyces cerevisiae”. Asian Journal of Food & Agro Industry, Vol. 2(02), 135-139.

54. Pinheiro, D. T., Rocha, M. V. P., Mac. Edo, G. R. and Goncalves, L. R. B.2008. “Evaluation of cashew apple juice for the production of fuel ethanol,” Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, vol. 148, no. 1–3, pp. 227–234.

55. Rocha, M. V. P., Oliveira, A. H. S., Souza, M. C. M and Goncalves, L. R. B. 2006 “Natural cashew apple juice as fermentation medium for biosurfactant production by Acinetobacter calcoaceticus,” World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1295–1299.

56. Roukas, T. 1994. Solid-state fermentation of carob pods for ethanol production, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 41: 296-301.

57. Sanchez, O. J. and C. A. Cardona. 2008. “Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 99, no. 13, pp. 5270–5295.

58. Sharaghat, H., Najafpour, G.D., Rezaei, P. S. and Sharifzadeh, M. 2010. Optimal growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (PTCC 24860) on pretreated molasses for the ethanol production: The application of the response surface methodology. Chemical Industry & Chemical Engineering Quarterly. 16(2): 199 206.

59. Shilpa, C., Malhotra, Girisha and Chanchal. 2013. Alcohol Production from Fruit and Vegetable Waste. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research. 8(15):1749-1756.

60. Suhas V Bhandari, Arun Panchapakesan, Naveen Shankar, H G Ashok Kumar. 2013. Production of Bioethanol From Fruit Rinds by Saccharification and Fermentation. International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology; Vol- 2 (6): 362-365.

61. Thippareddy, K. S. and Agrawal, Pushpa .2010. Pretreatment of Agriculture waste using Aspergillus flavus for theproduction of ethanol by Saccharomyceses cerviceae Journal of Environmental Research And Development 5(2): 393

62. Togarepi, E., Mapiye, C., Muchanyereyi, N. and Dzomba, P. 2012. Optimization of Fermentation Parameters for Ethanol Production from Ziziphus mauritiana Fruit Pulp Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae (NA33). International Journal of Biochemistry Research & Review 2(2): 60-69

280


63. Turner, D., Xu, H., Cracknell, R. F., Natarajan, V. and Chen, X. 2011. “Combustion performance of bio-ethanol at various blend ratios in a gasoline direct injection engine,” Fuel, vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 1999–2006.

64. Ueda, S., Zenin, C.T., Monteiro, D.A. and Park, Y.K.1981. Production of ethanol from raw cassava starch by a non-conventional fermentation method. In: John Wiley and Sons Inc. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 23: 291-299.

65. Van Zyl, W. H., Lynd, L. R., den Haan, R and McBride, J. E. 2007.“Consolidated bioprocessing for bioethanol production using saccharomyces cerevisiae,” Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, vol. 108, pp. 205–235.

66. Walker, G. M. 2011. Fuel ethanol: current production and future challenges, Journal of the Institute of Brewing, vol. 117, no. 1, pp. 3–22.

Author’s details

Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore- 641046 (Tamilnadu), India. Department Of Botany & Biotechnology, SRI SIDDAGANGA COLLEGE OF ARTS, COMMERCE AND SCIENCE FOR WOMEN, (Affiliated To Tumkur University, Karnataka), B.H. Road, Tumkur – 572 102, (Karnataka). Bhoomigeetha Institute of Research & Development (BIRD), B.H. Road, Tumkur- 572 102, Karnataka, India. Corresponding Author: [email protected].

Copy for Cite this Article- Thouseef Ahamad, M. Y., and G. Panduranga Murthy, “Production of Bio-Ethanol from Some Less Edible Fruit Resources in Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation Process followed by Characterization through GC–MS Analysis’, International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, Volume 4 Issue 1: 2016, pp. 260- 281.

281

an open access journal production of bio-ethanol from · pdf filebeing generated by ethyl...

Documents