CESS OPTIMIZATION OF BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION FROM PEELS ASSAVA CULTIVARS USING DIFFERENT MICROBIAL INNOCULANTS AUGUST 2015

Transcription

1 CESS OPTIMIZATION OF BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION FROM PEELS ASSAVA CULTIVARS USING DIFFERENT MICROBIAL INNOCULANTS by Edak Aniedi 1, Obianwa Chibuzor Uchenna 1 and Igile Godwin 2 artment of Genetics & Biotechnology 1 and Department of Biochemis UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR, NIGERIA AUGUST 2015

2 ASSAVA IS CULTIVATED EXTENSIVELY AS OD CROP IN NIGERIA AND OTHER TROPIC EGIONS ROCESSED INTO TAPIOCA, GARRI, FUFU A ASSAVA FLOUR RD LARGEST SOURCE OF CARBOHYDRATE E WORLD HERE S A GROWING INTEREST IN T ONVERSION OF ORGANIC WASTES L ASSAVA PEELS INTO USEFUL END-PRODUC

3 TRACTIVEFEATURESOFCASSAVA: igh yielding bletogrowonmarginalsoils equiresminimallabourandmangtcosts hus,goodcandidateforbioethanolprod

4 OF STUDY -TO OPTIMIZE THE PRODUCTION OF ETHANOL USING DIFFERENT MICROBIAL INOCULANTS THE SIMULTANEOUS SACCHARIFICATION AND MENTATION OF CASSAVA PEELS IN 3 CASSAVA IETIES.

5 INNOCULANTS USED Aspergillus niger + Saccharomyces cerevisiae Aspergillus niger + Saccharomyces cerevisiae + Rhizopus nigricans Spirogyra africana + Saccharomyces cerevisiae + Rhizopus nigricans Aspergillus niger + Saccharomyces cerevisiae + Spirogyra africana Rhizopus nigricans + Saccharomyces cerevisiae

6 ETHODOLOGY : eels from 3 cassava cultivars TME 0505, TME 419 nd TME 4779, were washed, dried in an oven at 20 o C for 3hours, ground into a fine texture using cally made milling machine & sieved with 1.5µ ylon sieve. ultured under anaerobic condition at different p small bioreactors using the five inoculants eparately.

7 Optical Density (microbial growth) was measured using a spectrophotometer every 3 days. Trial fermentation was done to find out the optimal parameters required for high ethanol yields Amount of Ethanol produced was recorded at 7, 14 & 21 days using optimal parameters

8 TABLE 1 ptical densities (indicating microbial growth) for different inoculum a 40nm and the observed ph (in brackets) in cassava cultivar TME 0505 Inoculum Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Rhizopus/yeast (5) 1.22 (4) (4) (5) 1.33 (5) 1.22 (5) (5) Aspergillus/yeast (6) (6) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) Aspergillus/ Rhizopus/yeast 1.12 (5) 1.34 (5) (5) (5) (5) 0.95 (6) (6) Rhizopus/Spirogyra/ye ast spergillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast (5) (5) 1.42 (5) (5) (5) 1.35 (6) (6) (5) (5) (5) 1.61 (5) (5) (6) (6)

9 .D Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Day 21 Rhizopus/yeast Aspergillus/yeast Aspergillus/ Rhizopus/yeast Rhizopus/Spirogyra/yeast Aspergillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast FIG. 1: Growth curve obtained from treating cassava cultivar TME 0505 with different innocula

10 TABLE 2 crobial growth from different inoculants at optical density of 540nm and the observed ph, in cultivar TME 419 TME 419 Inoculum Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Day 2 hizopus/yeast 1.03 (5) (4) (5) (5) (5) 1.23 (6) (6) ( pergillus/yeast 0.94 (5) (4) (5) (5) (5) (5) (6) ( Aspergillus/ hizopus/yeast (5) (5) 1.42 (5) 1.22 (5) (5) (6) (6) ( us/spirogyra/yeast (6) (5) (5) 1.62 (5) 1.52 (6) 1.41 (6) (6) 1.16 (8 gillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast (5) (5) (5) (5) (6) 1.4 (6) 1.34 (6) 1.2 (8

11 Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Day 21 Rhizopus/yeast Aspergillus/yeast Aspergillus/ Rhizopus/yeast Rhizopus/Spirogyra/yeast Aspergillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast G. 2: Growth curve obtained from treating cassava cultivar TME 419 with different inoculants

12 TABLE 3 icrobial growth for different inoculum at optical density of 540nm and the obser ph, on cassava cultivar TME 4779 TME 4779 Inoculum Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Day 2 hizopus/yeast (4) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) pergillus/yeast (5) (5) (5) (4) 1.14 (5) (5) (6) Aspergillus/ hizopus/yeast (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (6) (6) us/spirogyra/yeast (5) (5) (5) (5) (6) (6) (6) gillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast (5) (5) (5) 1.48 (6) (6) (6) (6) 1.126

13 Day 0 Day 3 Day 6 Day 9 Day 12 Day 15 Day 18 Day 21 opus/yeast Aspergillus/yeast Aspergillus/ Rhizopus/yeast Rhizopus/Spirogyra/yeast Aspergillus/ Spirogyra/ yeast 3: Growth curve obtained from treating cassava cultivar TME 4779 with different inoculants

14 ULTS OF FERMENTATION AT OPTIMIZED PARAMETERS ph 5.0, temperature 28 o C, increased surface area of substrate, substrate concentration and inoculant culture concentration on Days 7, 14 and 21 are shownintables5,6and7.

15 TABLE 5 Ethanol yield obtained on the 7th day from three cassava cultivars treated with the different inoculants TME 0505 TME 419 TME 4779 lum vol (ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/ b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± 13 b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b 18 a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± trol 8.67 c ± c ± c ± c ± c ± c ±0

16 TABLE 6 nol yield obtained on the 14th day from three cassava cultiv treated with different inoculants TME 0505 TME 419 TME 4779 lum vol(ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/c b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ±0 trol 6.67 c ± c ± c ± c ± c ± c ±1.

17 TABLE 7 Ethanol yield obtained on the 21st day from three cassava cultivars treated with different inoculants TME 0505 TME 419 TME 4779 culum vol(ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/cm) vol (ml) mass (g/c A b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ±1 B 14 b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ±0 C 11 b ± b ± b ± b ± b ± b ±0. D 17 a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ±1 E 21 a ± a ± a ± a ± a ± a ±0 ntrol 9.67 c ± c ± c ± c ± c ± c ±0.

18 TABLE 8 Proximate Analysis of Cassava Cultivars Parameter Tested TME 4779 TME 419 TME 0505 Moisture Content (%) Dry Matter (%) Starch (%) Fibre (%) Ash (%) Protein (%) Fat (%) Carbon Nitrogen Phosphorus(ppm)

19 DISCUSSION he yield reported in this study competes favorably ith (and sometimes better than) those reported from assava peels using other inoculants, potato peels and poilt mangoes by other workers. rowth curves obtained using the five treatmen iffered slightly, reflecting differences in the enzyma omposition of these microorganisms and in t ompositionofpeelsofthethreecassavavarieties.

20 n optimum ph of 5.0 obtained in this study is t Hatwhicheachcurveshowedmaximumactivit assava cultivar 4779 when treated with Rhizop igricans, Spirogyra africana and Saccharomy ereviceae gave the highest yield of 19.01g/c nd percentage concentration yield of 22% on t thday. his may be attributed to the presence pirogyra as an additional carbon source for t icroorganisms.

21 pirogyra generally is known to b utotrophic and its carbohydrat omposition can also lead to increase i he release of sugars for fermentation. Thi esult is in line with the work of Sulfahri e l., (2011) but gave a higher yield in th resence of cassava peel substrate an ood ph conditions.

22 anol yield obtained in the present study ch lower than the 67.7% and 63.8% reported eleke and Jubril 2009 when Aspergillus nig Zymomonas mobilis were us ultaneously on guinea corn husk and mil sk respectively. n line with reports that Saccharomyces erevisiae is a non- amylolytic microorganism nable to hydrolyse strarch ( Jumai et al., 2006) w concentrations of ethanol were obtained in is study.

23 ME 4779 has the highest % starch omposition of 72.19, Carbon-Nitrogenhosphorus (ppm) of and dry matter o 4.92%; this may have contributed to the igher ethanol yield from it. Also the low fibr nd ash content of cassava cultivar TME 0505 ade it susceptible to quick microbial reakdown.

24 CONCLUSION e process of bioethanol production can timized for increased ethanol yield at a reduc riod of fermentation by improving the vario rameters affecting the medium (ph, substr rface area and concentration). oethanol production from Spirogyra holds nificant potential due to their low percentage nin and hemicellulose content compared her ligno-cellulosic plants.

25 pirogyra can be cultivated and prolifera ore, as a major feedstock for biof roduction. assava cultivars can be developed w igher starch content and lower fibre valu o that the wastes generated can have hig ioethanol potential.

26 There is need to invest in large-sc technology plants for conversion of bioma ricultural wastes) to useful products as this w vide wealth and employment. he use of agricultural wastes instead of sta ds for biofuel production will not infringe ailable food supply. It will in addition redu llution arising from improper management se wastes.

27 THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION