Evaluation of High Throughput Screening Methods in Picking up Differences between Cultivars of Lignocellulosic Biomass for Ethanol Production

Jane Lindedam, Sander Bruun, Henning Jørgensen, Stephen R. Decker, Geoffrey B. Turner, Jaclyn D. DeMartini, Charles E. Wyman, Claus Felby

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Scopus Citations

Abstract

We present a unique evaluation of three advanced high throughput pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis systems (HTPH-systems) for screening of lignocellulosic biomass for enzymatic saccharification. Straw from 20 cultivars of winter wheat from two sites in Denmark was hydrothermally pretreated and enzymatically processed in each of the separately engineered HTPH-systems at 1) University of California, Riverside, 2) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Colorado, and 3) University of Copenhagen (CPH). All three systems were able to detect significant differences between the cultivars in the release of fermentable sugars, with average cellulose conversions of 57%, 64%, and 71% from Riverside, NREL and CPH, respectively. The best correlation of glucose yields was found between the Riverside and NREL systems (R2=0.2139), and the best correlation for xylose yields was found between Riverside and CPH (R2=0.4269). All three systems identified Flair as the highest yielding cultivar and Dinosor, Glasgow, and Robigus as low yielding cultivars. Despite different conditions in the three HTPH-systems, the approach of microscale screening for phenotypically less recalcitrant feedstock seems sufficiently robust to be used as a generic analytical platform.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)261-267
Number of pages7
JournalBiomass and Bioenergy
Volume66
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

NREL Publication Number

  • NREL/JA-2700-60618

Keywords

  • Genetic selection
  • High throughput screening
  • Lignocellulosic ethanol
  • Microscale pretreatment
  • Wheat straw

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of High Throughput Screening Methods in Picking up Differences between Cultivars of Lignocellulosic Biomass for Ethanol Production'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this