Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34823583›Full record

ArticleBiotechnology for biofuels2021

Cellulosic ethanol production by consortia of Scheffersomyces stipitis and engineered Zymomonas mobilis.

Lingling Sun, Bo Wu, Zengqin Zhang, Jing Yan, Panting Liu, Chao Song, Samina Shabbir, Qili Zhu, Shihui Yang, Nan Peng and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biotechnology for biofuels, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Lingling SunKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Bo WuKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Zengqin ZhangKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Jing YanKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Panting LiuKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Chao SongKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Samina ShabbirKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Qili ZhuKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Shihui YangHubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Green Transformation of Bio-Resources, Environmental Microbial Technology Center of Hubei Province, Hubei Key Laboratory of Industrial Biotechnology, College of Life Sciences, Hubei University, Wuhan, 430062, China.
Nan PengState Key Laboratory of Agricultural Microbiology, College of Life Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, 430070, China.
Mingxiong HeKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China. hemingxiong@caas.cn.
Furong TanKey Laboratory of Development and Application of Rural Renewable Energy, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Chengdu, 610041, China. tanfurong@caas.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8626-8136
Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture · CNHuazhong Agricultural University · CNHubei University · CNMinistry of Agriculture · HUNational Institute of Measurement and Testing Technology · CN

Funding

agricultural science and technology innovation project of chinese academy of agricultural sciences CAAS-ASTIP-2016-BIOMAcentral public-interest scientific institution basal research fund 1610012017004_05102sichuan science and technology program 2020YFH0021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs one of the clean and sustainable energies, lignocellulosic ethanol has achieved much attention around the world. The production of lignocellulosic ethanol does not compete with people for food, while the consumption of ethanol could contribute to the carbon dioxide emission reduction. However, the simultaneous transformation of glucose and xylose to ethanol is one of the key technologies for attaining cost-efficient lignocellulosic ethanol production at an industrial scale. Genetic modification of strains and constructing consortia were two approaches to resolve this issue. Compared with strain improvement, the synergistic interaction of consortia in metabolic pathways should be more useful than using each one separately.

resultsIn this study, the consortia consisting of suspended Scheffersomyces stipitis CICC1960 and Zymomonas mobilis 8b were cultivated to successfully depress carbon catabolite repression (CCR) in artificially simulated 80G40XRM. With this strategy, a 5.52% more xylose consumption and a 6.52% higher ethanol titer were achieved by the consortium, in which the inoculation ratio between S. stipitis and Z. mobilis was 1:3, compared with the Z. mobilis 8b mono-fermentation. Subsequently, one copy of the xylose metabolic genes was inserted into the Z. mobilis 8b genome to construct Z. mobilis FR2, leading to the xylose final-consumption amount and ethanol titer improvement by 15.36% and 6.81%, respectively. Finally, various corn stover hydrolysates with different sugar concentrations (glucose and xylose 60, 90, 120 g/L), were used to evaluate the fermentation performance of the consortium consisting of S. stipitis CICC1960 and Z. mobilis FR2. Fermentation results showed that a 1.56-4.59% higher ethanol titer was achieved by the consortium compared with the Z. mobilis FR2 mono-fermentation, and a 46.12-102.14% higher ethanol titer was observed in the consortium fermentation when compared with the S. stipitis CICC1960 mono-fermentation. Furthermore, qRT-PCR analysis of xylose/glucose transporter and other genes responsible for CCR explained the reason why the initial ratio inoculation of 1:3 in artificially simulated 80G40XRM had the best fermentation performance in the consortium.

conclusionsThe fermentation strategy used in this study, i.e., using a genetically modified consortium, had a superior performance in ethanol production, as compared with the S. stipitis CICC1960 mono-fermentation and the Z. mobilis FR2 mono-fermentation alone. This result showed that this strategy has potential for future lignocellulosic ethanol production.

Indexed as

Carbon catabolite repressionCorn stover hydrolysateEthanol fermentationS. stipitisZ. mobilis

Identifiers

PMID34823583
PMCPMC8613960
OpenAlexW3214936117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.