Pretreatment of wheat straw with ligninolytic fungi for increased biogas productivity

Shah, Tawaf Ali; Ullah, Raqeeb

doi:10.1007/s13762-019-02277-8

Cited by 40 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Custom templates (e.g., Excel) or scripts (e.g., Matlab or R) should be checked by comparing to standardized approaches. The web application the Online Biogas App (OBA) or the biogas package in R [45] can be used as a reference or even completely replace the use of custom data processing templates, as in recent publications [36,77]. Regardless, publications must clearly state how calculations were carried out and what software tools were used (see Section 2.6 for an example).…”

Section: Data Processing and Reportingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)

Hafner

Laclos

Koch

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests used to determine the ultimate methane yield of organic substrates are not sufficiently standardized to ensure reproducibility among laboratories. In this contribution, a standardized BMP protocol was tested in a large inter-laboratory project, and results were used to quantify sources of variability and to refine validation criteria designed to improve BMP reproducibility. Three sets of BMP tests were carried out by more than thirty laboratories from fourteen countries, using multiple measurement methods, resulting in more than 400 BMP values. Four complex but homogenous substrates were tested, and additionally, microcrystalline cellulose was used as a positive control. Inter-laboratory variability in reported BMP values was moderate. Relative standard deviation among laboratories (RSDR) was 7.5 to 24%, but relative range (RR) was 31 to 130%. Systematic biases were associated with both laboratories and tests within laboratories. Substrate volatile solids (VS) measurement and inoculum origin did not make major contributions to variability, but errors in data processing or data entry were important. There was evidence of negative biases in manual manometric and manual volumetric measurement methods. Still, much of the observed variation in BMP values was not clearly related to any of these factors and is probably the result of particular practices that vary among laboratories or even technicians. Based on analysis of calculated BMP values, a set of recommendations was developed, considering measurement, data processing, validation, and reporting. Recommended validation criteria are: (i) test duration at least 1% net 3 d, (ii) relative standard deviation for cellulose BMP not higher than 6%, and (iii) mean cellulose BMP between 340 and 395 NmLCH4 gVS−1. Evidence from this large dataset shows that following the recommendations—in particular, application of validation criteria—can substantially improve reproducibility, with RSDR < 8% and RR < 25% for all substrates. The cellulose BMP criterion was particularly important. Results show that is possible to measure very similar BMP values with different measurement methods, but to meet the recommended validation criteria, some laboratories must make changes to their BMP methods. To help improve the practice of BMP measurement, a new website with detailed, up-to-date guidance on BMP measurement and data processing was established.

show abstract

Section: Data Processing and Reportingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)

Hafner

Laclos

Koch

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, several studies select different microbial populations for hydrolysis of their specific substrates [158]. Shah and Ullah [39] selected strains producing lignin peroxidases and laccases and decreased 48.2% of lignin from wheat straw within 7 days of batch incubation; and observed 407.1% increase of the methane yield in comparison with the untreated wheat straw.…”

Section: Biological Pretreatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insight into Pretreatment Methods of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Increase Biogas Yield: Current State, Challenges, and Opportunities

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lignocellulosic biomass is recalcitrant due to its heterogeneous structure, which is one of the major limitations for its use as a feedstock for methane production. Although different pretreatment methods are being used, intermediaries formed are known to show adverse effect on microorganisms involved in methane formation. This review, apart from highlighting the efficiency and limitations of the different pretreatment methods from engineering, chemical, and biochemical point of views, will discuss the strategies to increase the carbon recovery in the form of methane by way of amending pretreatments to lower inhibitory effects on microbial groups and by optimizing process conditions.

show abstract

“…Anaerobic digestion is a technique applied globally for the treatment of agro-industrial and municipal waste streams and contributes efficiently to solid waste reduction and bioenergy production in the form of biogas (Elasri and Afilal, 2016; Shah and Ullah, 2019; Sogn et al, 2018). It involves four main steps of hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis and methanogenesis (Li et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anaerobic co-digestion of spent coconut copra with cow urine for enhanced biogas production

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory-scale bioreactors were used to co-digest spent coconut copra (SCC) and cow urine (CU) as a co-substrate (SCC + CU) in a batch mode under thermophilic condition (45 ± 2°C) in order to enhance biogas production. The effect of CU pretreatment on the performance indicators (biogas and biomethane yields, total solids (TS), and volatile solids (VS) reduction, pH and volatile fatty acids (VFAs) concentrations) were also examined. This was compared with mono-digestion of SCC. The experiment was performed with different mixing ratios in reactors labelled as follows: A = 75 g SCC + 5 ml CU; B = 70 g SCC + 10 ml CU; C = 65 g SCC + 15 ml CU; and D (control) = 80 g SCC at a hydraulic retention time of 42 days. Co-digestion (SCC + CU) significantly improved anaerobic digestion (AD) performance resulting in a threefold and fivefold increase in biogas and biomethane production, respectively, with concomitant TS (44.9–57.7%) and VS (55.4–60.3%) removal efficiencies. But for mono-digestion (control experiment), all CU treated and co-digestion assays showed pH stability ranging between 6.6 and 7.4 and VFAs’ concentrations ranging from 15–330 mgL-1. By acting as a buffer, CU effectively enhanced the AD performance of SCC as demonstrated in this study.

show abstract

Pretreatment of wheat straw with ligninolytic fungi for increased biogas productivity

Cited by 40 publications

References 21 publications

Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)

Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)

Insight into Pretreatment Methods of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Increase Biogas Yield: Current State, Challenges, and Opportunities

Anaerobic co-digestion of spent coconut copra with cow urine for enhanced biogas production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About