Antimicrobial strategies for limiting bacterial contaminants in fuel bioethanol fermentations

Muthaiyan, Arunachalam; Limayem, Alya; Ricke, Steven C.

doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2010.06.005

Cited by 109 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 213 publications

(251 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fuel alcohol production is a non-sterile process, and contamination control and good hygienic operations are of utmost importance in bioethanol plants. In addition to heat treatments of raw materials, air, water, vessels, pipework etc, bioethanol distilleries may acid-wash (e.g., H 2 SO 4 ) recycled yeast slurries, apply preventative antibiotics such as penicillin and virginiamycin (these are now restricted 75 ), use various chemical cleaners, sanitisers and sterilants (e.g., chlorine dioxide, ammonium bifluoride, potassium metabisulphite, urea hydrogen peroxide, hop acids) to control microbial contamination. Various strategies for control of microbial (wild yeast and bacterial) contaminants in bioethanol fermentations have been discussed by Muthaiyan et al 75 ).…”

Section: Bioethanol Fermentations Microbes For Bioethanol Fermentationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to heat treatments of raw materials, air, water, vessels, pipework etc, bioethanol distilleries may acid-wash (e.g., H 2 SO 4 ) recycled yeast slurries, apply preventative antibiotics such as penicillin and virginiamycin (these are now restricted 75 ), use various chemical cleaners, sanitisers and sterilants (e.g., chlorine dioxide, ammonium bifluoride, potassium metabisulphite, urea hydrogen peroxide, hop acids) to control microbial contamination. Various strategies for control of microbial (wild yeast and bacterial) contaminants in bioethanol fermentations have been discussed by Muthaiyan et al 75 ). Selection of specific starter cultures of S. cerevisiae with bactericidal activity to control contaminants in bioethanol distilleries is an interesting development 30 .…”

Section: Bioethanol Fermentations Microbes For Bioethanol Fermentationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

125th Anniversary Review: Fuel Alcohol: Current Production and Future Challenges

Walker

2011

Journal of the Institute of Brewing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

J. Inst. Brew. 117(1), 3-22, 2011Global research and industrial development of liquid transportation biofuels are moving at a rapid pace. This is mainly due to the significant roles played by biofuels in decarbonising our future energy needs, since they act to mitigate the deleterious impacts of greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere that are contributors of climate change. Governmental obligations and international directives that mandate the blending of biofuels in petrol and diesel are also acting as great stimuli to this expanding industrial sector. Currently, the predominant liquid biofuel is bioethanol (fuel alcohol) and its worldwide production is dominated by maize-based and sugar cane-based processes in North and South America, respectively. In Europe, fuel alcohol production employs primarily wheat and sugar beet. Potable distilled spirit production and fuel alcohol processes share many similarities in terms of starch bioconversion, fermentation, distillation and co-product utilisation, but there are some key differences. For example, in certain bioethanol fermentations, it is now possible to yield consistently high ethanol concentrations of ~20% (v/v). Emerging fuel alcohol processes exploit lignocellulosic feedstocks and scientific and technological constraints involved in depolymerising these materials and efficiently fermenting the hydrolysate sugars are being overcome. These so-called secondgeneration fuel alcohol processes are much more environmentally and ethically acceptable compared with exploitation of starch and sugar resources, especially when considering utilisation of residual agricultural biomass and biowastes. This review covers both first and second-generation bioethanol processes with a focus on current challenges and future opportunities of lignocellulose-to-ethanol as this technology moves from demonstration pilot-plants to full-scale industrial facilities.

show abstract

Section: Bioethanol Fermentations Microbes For Bioethanol Fermentationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bioethanol Fermentations Microbes For Bioethanol Fermentationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

125th Anniversary Review: Fuel Alcohol: Current Production and Future Challenges

Walker

2011

Journal of the Institute of Brewing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, industrial-scale bioethanol fermentation is frequently stressed by bacterial contaminants (Muthaiyan et al, 2011). Bacterial contamination can inhibit the growth of S. cerevisiae and result in decreased bioethanol yield, then eventually lead to economic losses (Thomas et al, 2001;Narendranath and Power, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control of Lactobacillus plantarum Contamination in Bioethanol Fermentation by Adding Plantaricins

Liu¹,

Liu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2017

IJAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacteriocin is considered as a potential biological method for controlling bacterial contamination. Plantaricins can inhibit the growth of Lactobacillus species closely related to the producer. In this study, Lactobacillus plantarum ATCC 8014 was cocultivated with Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C to mimic the bacterial contamination in industrial bioethanol fermentation. Plantaricins produced by L. plantarum ATCC BAA-793 was added into the co-cultivation system to control L. plantarum 8014 contamination. The final ethanol content and cell number of S. cerevisiae and L. plantarum 8014 were determined to assess the controlling effect. Results showed that plantaricins could effectively control L. plantarum contamination and remarkably reduce the inhibition effect on S. cerevisiae. Furthermore, plantaricins did no harm to the S. cerevisiae growth and bioethanol yield. These results suggested the potential of plantaricins as a novel antibacterial agent for controlling L. plantarum contamination during the bioethanol fermentation.

show abstract

“…Contamination may come from the quality of the raw material, the dilution water used in the mash and the industry itself through pipes and pieces of equipment exposed to microorganisms (Oliveira et al, 2013). The presence of unwanted microorganisms can affect the process through consumption of sugar, decrease of yeast cell viability due to the toxins secreted by bacteria in the medium, yeast flocculation, which causes loss of yeast cells at the bottom of the vat or in the centrifuge, and decrease in industrial yield (Muthaiyan et al, 2011). Furthermore, there is the formation of gums and biofilms, which increase juice viscosity and cause operational problems in the plant (Skinner-Neme et al, 2007), reducing the efficiency of ethanol production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When contamination values exceed the acceptable levels and the usual yeast treatment is not sufficient to the control, industry uses antimicrobials to the combat, such as antibiotics (Muthaiyan et al, 2011). Many, as Kamoran®, are employed with relative level of success in reducing contamination (Leite et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of antimicrobials for contamination control during ethanolic fermentation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antimicrobial strategies for limiting bacterial contaminants in fuel bioethanol fermentations

Cited by 109 publications

References 213 publications

125th Anniversary Review: Fuel Alcohol: Current Production and Future Challenges

125th Anniversary Review: Fuel Alcohol: Current Production and Future Challenges

Control of Lactobacillus plantarum Contamination in Bioethanol Fermentation by Adding Plantaricins

Use of antimicrobials for contamination control during ethanolic fermentation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About