↓ Skip to main content

Continuous production of biohythane from hydrothermal liquefied cornstalk biomass via two-stage high-rate anaerobic reactors

Overview of attention for article published in Biotechnology for Biofuels, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Continuous production of biohythane from hydrothermal liquefied cornstalk biomass via two-stage high-rate anaerobic reactors
Published in
Biotechnology for Biofuels, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13068-016-0666-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bu-Chun Si, Jia-Ming Li, Zhang-Bing Zhu, Yuan-Hui Zhang, Jian-Wen Lu, Rui-Xia Shen, Chong Zhang, Xin-Hui Xing, Zhidan Liu

Abstract

Biohythane production via two-stage fermentation is a promising direction for sustainable energy recovery from lignocellulosic biomass. However, the utilization of lignocellulosic biomass suffers from specific natural recalcitrance. Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is an emerging technology for the liquefaction of biomass, but there are still several challenges for the coupling of HTL and two-stage fermentation. One particular challenge is the limited efficiency of fermentation reactors at a high solid content of the treated feedstock. Another is the conversion of potential inhibitors during fermentation. Here, we report a novel strategy for the continuous production of biohythane from cornstalk through the integration of HTL and two-stage fermentation. Cornstalk was converted to solid and liquid via HTL, and the resulting liquid could be subsequently fed into the two-stage fermentation systems. The systems consisted of two typical high-rate reactors: an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) and a packed bed reactor (PBR). The liquid could be efficiently converted into biohythane via the UASB and PBR with a high density of microbes at a high organic loading rate. Biohydrogen production decreased from 2.34 L/L/day in UASB (1.01 L/L/day in PBR) to 0 L/L/day as the organic loading rate (OLR) of the HTL liquid products increased to 16 g/L/day. The methane production rate achieved a value of 2.53 (UASB) and 2.54 L/L/day (PBR), respectively. The energy and carbon recovery of the integrated HTL and biohythane fermentation system reached up to 79.0 and 67.7%, respectively. The fermentation inhibitors, i.e., 5-hydroxymethyl furfural (41.4-41.9% of the initial quantity detected) and furfural (74.7-85.0% of the initial quantity detected), were degraded during hydrogen fermentation. Compared with single-stage fermentation, the methane process during two-stage fermentation had a more efficient methane production rate, acetogenesis, and COD removal. The microbial distribution via Illumina MiSeq sequencing clarified that the biohydrogen process in the two-stage systems functioned not only for biohydrogen production, but also for the degradation of potential inhibitors. The higher distribution of the detoxification family Clostridiaceae, Bacillaceae, and Pseudomonadaceae was found in the biohydrogen process. In addition, a higher distribution of acetate-oxidizing bacteria (Spirochaetaceae) was observed in the biomethane process of the two-stage systems, revealing improved acetogenesis accompanied with an efficient conversion of acetate. Biohythane production could be a promising process for the recovery of energy and degradation of organic compounds from hydrothermal liquefied biomass. The two-stage process not only contributed to the improved quality of the gas fuels but also strengthened the biotransformation process, which resulted from the function of detoxification during biohydrogen production and enhanced acetogenesis during biomethane production.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 17%
Student > Master 15 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemical Engineering 16 17%
Environmental Science 16 17%
Engineering 15 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 26 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,423,924
of 9,723,500 outputs
Outputs from Biotechnology for Biofuels
#356
of 842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,156
of 315,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biotechnology for Biofuels
#17
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,723,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 53rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 842 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.