Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al.

/ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology

Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054

Spirogyra biomass a renewable source for

biofuel (bioethanol) Production
*Fuad Salem Eshaq
Department of Chemistry, Centre for Environment,
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500085,
Andhra Pradesh (India).

Mir Naiman Ali

Department of Mirobiology, Mumtaz Degree & P.G College,
Malakpet, Hyderabad-500036, Andhra Pradesh (India)

Mazharuddin Khan Mohd.

Department of Mirobiology, Mumtaz Degree & P.G College,
Malakpet, Hyderabad-500036, Andhra Pradesh (India)

ABSTRACT
Biofuels refer to renewable fuels from biological sources that can be used for heat, electricity and fuel. The fuels
obtained from algae are termed as third generation fuels. The production of fuel from algae provides many
advantages when compared to the fuel produced from other sources like agrobased raw materials. Other than
environmental pollution control the algal biofuel will help in reduction of the fuel cost when compared to the
agrobased and fossil fuels. In the present study algae specifically Spirogyra was used for the production of
bioethanol by the fermentative process. A comparative study was carried out by using chemically pre-treated and
untreated Spirogyra biomass. The Spirogyra has a very simple cell wall made up of cellulose and starch that can be
converted to ethanol by the fermentation process. The Spirogyra biomass was subjected to saccharification process
by the fungal organism Aspergillus niger MTCCC 2196 for the hydrolysis, this process was followed by the
fermentation using yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae MTCC170 for the production of alcohol. A high yield of ethanol
was recorded for untreated Spirogyra biomass when compared to chemically pre-treated biomass. The yield of
alcohol using algal biomass is more when compared to alcohol produced from other sources like agrobased raw
materials.
Key words: Spirogyra, bioethanol, biofuel, Saccharomyes cerevisiae, Aspergillus niger.
Introduction
In the year 2008, fossil fuel accounted for 88% of the global primary energy consumption (1). The current
technological progress, potential reserves and increased exploitation leads to energy insecurity and climate change
by increasing greenhouse gas (GHGs) emission due to consumption of energy at higher rate. The use of fossil fuels
is now widely accepted as unsustainable due to depleting resources and the accumulation of GHGs in the
environment that have already exceeded the dangerously high threshold of 450 ppm CO2 (2). With the increase in
anthropogenic GHG emission and depleting fossil reserves, mainly due to large scale use of fossil fuel for transport,
electricity and thermal energy generation, it has become increasingly important to develop abatement techniques and
adopt policies to promote those renewable energy sources which are capable in sequestering the atmospheric CO2 to
minimize the dependency on fossil reserves and maintain environmental and economic sustainability (1, 3, 4, 5, 6).
The biofuel that is expected to be most widely used around the globe is ethanol, which can be produced from
abundant supplies of starch/cellulose biomass. The most important bioethanol production countries in the world are
Brazil, US and Canada (7). Since biomass assimilation by algal growth utilize atmospheric carbon dioxide, their

ISSN: 0975-5462

7045

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
biomass for bioethanol production can reduce green house gas levels. In addition, ethanol is less toxic, is readily
biodegradable and its use produces fewer air-borne pollutants than petroleum fuel. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the
Government of Canada has committed to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by 6% from 1990 levels between
2008 and 2012 (8). Ethanol blended gasoline has the potential to contribute significantly to reduce these emissions.
It can also be used as a fuel for electric power generation, in fuel cells (thermo-chemical action) and in power cogeneration systems, and as a raw material in chemical industry (9). Bioethanol can be employed to replace octane
enhancers such as methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT) and aromatic hydrocarbons such as
benzene or oxygenates such as methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) (8).
Energy conversion utilization and access underlie many of the great challenges of our time, including those
associated with sustainability, environmental quality, security and poverty (10, 11). Biofuels are an attractive
alternative to current petroleum based fuels as they can be utilized as transportation fuels with little change to
current technologies and have significant potential to improve sustainability and reduce GHG emissions (12).
Research on improving biofuel production has been accelerating for both ecological and economical reasons,
primarily for its use as an alternative to petroleum based fuels (3) Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) are also getting
attention but they need huge improvement s in technologies and also not suitable for transport (13).
Biofuels could play an essential part in reaching targets to replace petroleum based transportation fuels with a viable
alternative, and in reducing long term CO2 emission, if environmental and economic sustainability are considered
carefully (14) they can be direct and immediate replacements for the liquid fuels used for transport and can be easily
integrated to the logistic systems that are operating today (15). In recent years, the use of liquid biofuels in the
transport sectors has shown rapid global growth, driven mostly by policies focused on achievement of energy
security, and mitigation of GHG emission (16).
First and second- generation biofuels
First generation biofuels which have attained economic levels of commercial production, have been mainly
extracted from food and oil crops (viz. rapeseed oil, palm oil, sugarcane, sugar beet, wheat, barley, maize. etc) as
well as animal fats using conventional technology (17). The liquid biofuels production and consumption growth is
increasing day by day, but their impact towards meeting the overall energy demands in the transport sector will
remain limited due to competition with food and fiber production for the use of arable land, high water and fertilizer
requirements, lake of well managed agricultural practices in emerging economies, biodiversity conservation and
regionally constrained market structures.
Global biofuel production has been increasing rapidly over the last decade, but the expanding biofuel
industry has recently raised important concerns. In particular, the sustainability of many first generation biofuels
(primarily from food crops such as grains, sugar cane and vegetable oils) has been increasingly questioned over
concern such as reported displacement of food crops, effects on the environment and climate change.
The limitation of first generation biofuels produced from food crops have caused greater emphases to be
placed by second generation biofuels produced from lignocellulosic feed stocks, although significant progress
continue to be made to overcome the technical and economic challenges, second generation biofuels production will
continue to face major constraints to execute commercial deployment (18). The logistics of providing a competitive
supply of biomass feedstock to a commercial plant is challenging, as is improving the performance of the conversion
process to reduce costs.
The most positive impact of biofuels is the reduction of the GHGs emissions in the production and
consumption. This is because biomass production utilized atmospheric CO2 and biomass is renewable. On the other
hand, mass production of biofuel can lead to the increase of GHG emissions by the utilization of fossil transportation
fuels in the complicated logistic needed for biomass cultivation, collection, transportation and distribution of
biofuels. The deforestation or clearing grasslands to be used for biomass cultivation that leads to the emission of
CO2 captured in biomass and soil into the atmosphere. The lower content of sulfur reduces the SO2 emissions (9).
Bioethanol from algae, the third generation biofuels.
Algae are gaining wide attention as an alternative renewable source of biomass for the production of bioethanol,
which is grouped under the third generation biofuels (17). The major drawbacks of first and second generation

ISSN: 0975-5462

7046

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
biofuels are overcome to a greater extent by third generation biofuels. The concept of using algae as energy
feedstock dates back to the late 1950s (19) but a concerted effort began with the oil crisis in 1970s. Over the last
three decades there has been extensive research on algal biofuels production and the use of algae for CO2
bioremediation (20). The US Department of Energy (DOE) devoted $25 million to algal fuels research in its aquatic
species program at the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) in Golden, Colorado from 1978 to 1996. The
program gave way to mile stone advances that set the stage for algal biofuel research today (21).
Algae represent a vast variety of photosynthetic species dwindling in diverse environments (22, 17). They may be
autotrophic or heterotrophic. The autotrophic algae use photosynthesis to harness sunlight and fix the inorganic
carbon from atmospheric CO2 which is then assimilated in the form of reserve food materials such as carbohydrate.
There are many algal species which are heterotrophic and they are able to take up small organic molecules in the
environment and turn them into the building blocks of their own which are mainly fat or oil and proteins. There are
certain algal species which can use neither inorganic carbon (CO2) from atmosphere nor organic carbon from the
environment and this process is called mixotrophy. Through any of the three processes, algae can produce
carbohydrates, lipids and proteins over a short period of time, which can then be processed to generate biofuels.
Some algae can even serve as self biorefinery for ethanol production during anaerobic dark condition by utilizing
their photosynthates. There are several reports documenting the potential of algal biomass to generate biofuels (23,
24, 25).While considering algal biofuels, the first point that comes to view is about the biodiesel, as many of the
algae are oleaginous in nature and are exploited for the production of biodiesel. Besides biodiesel, algae can be
cultivated and can be used as feedstock for the production of bioethanol. The algal starch, cellulose or other
accumulating carbohydrates can be used for the production of ethanol after hydrolysis.
Microalgae are thought to be one of the earliest life forms on earth (26) and they are the fastest growing plants in the
world, since they can inhabit diverse ecological habitats ranging from fresh water, brackish water, or sea water, they
are able to thrive in various extreme temperatures and PH conditions. These peculiarities make microalgae the most
abundant organism on earth. There has been remarkable surge in research to investigate the utilization of microalgae
as an advanced energy feedstock for bioethanol production (27, 28,29). Microalgae like Chlorella, Dunaliella,
Chlamydomonas, Scenedesmus, Spirulina are known to contain large amount (> 50% of the dry weight) of starch
and glycogen, useful as raw materials for ethanol production (30). Microalgae can assimilate cellulose which can
also be fermented to bioethanol (19).
Spirogyra is one of the commonest of green algae abundant in spring. It is found in bright green free
floating masses in the still water fresh water ponds, pools, lakes and ditches and also in flowing streams. According
to Randhawa1959 genus includes about 289 species and of these 94 have been reported from India. The plant body
is thallus which consists of a long green cylindrical thread about 1/10mm across and several centimeters long. It is
silky, hair like unbranched and often called a filament. Each cell consists of cell wall enclosing the protoplast. The
cell wall consists of two concentric layers. The inner is cellulose in nature. The outer is a pectose layer covered with
mucilage sheath. In the present study bioethanol was produced by a fermentation process using alga Spirogyra
biomass, the powdered biomass was processed and treated chemically. Fermentation was carried out in two stepssaccharification and fermentation using Aspergillus niger MTCC 2196 and Saccharomyces cerevisiae MTCC 170.
Materials & Methods:
Microorganisms and culture:
1.

Spirogyra: The alga Spirogyra was collected from Mir Alam Lake-situated in Hyderabad city (India).
The algal mat was collected in sterile containers and transferred to the laboratory.

2.

Fungal cultures- Two fungal cultures Aspergillus niger MTCC2196 and Saccharomyces cerevisiae
MTCC 170 were procured from MTCC (Microbial Type Culture Collection Centre and Gene Bank)
Chandigarh. The fungi Aspergillus niger was cultured and maintained on potato dextrose agar medium
at 300C. The yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae was cultured and maintained on YPD (Yeast extract,
peptone and dextrose) agar media at 300C.

ISSN: 0975-5462

7047

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
Methods:
Identification of the algal sample: The algal sample was identified by the methods of Smith (31) and
upon microscopic examination it was identified as Spirogyra species.
Processing of biomass: The sample was subjected to sun dryness in which about 40% moisture content
was observed. The dried Spirogyra biomass was grinded and filtered through 1mm sieve. Fine powder of
Spirogyra biomass thus obtained was used for all fermentation experiments by taking two variations: half
of the biomass was chemically pre-treated and remaining biomass was left untreated.
Chemical pre-treatment of Spirogyra biomass: The Spirogyra biomass was chemically pretreated with
1%NaOH for a period of 2 hrs (32, 33).
Chemical analysis of Spirogyra biomass: Spirogyra biomass was subjected to the estimation of total
sugars (34), reducing sugars (35) and cellulose content (36).
Fermentation Studies:
For comparative studies Spirogyra biomass was used for fermentative production of bioethanol in two
variations- chemically pre-treated form and untreated form. Fermentation studies were performed in 250
ml Erlenmeyer flasks with three different variations:
i.
5g of the biomass in 100ml of distilled water,
ii.
5g of the biomass in 100ml distilled water containing 0.5% of lactose and
iii.
5g of the biomass in 100ml of synthetic media containing the following components
(g/100ml): L-Glutamic acid, 0.03; NH4No3, 0.14; KH2PO4, 0.2; CaCl2, 0.03; MgSO4, 0.03;
Proteose peptone, 0.75; FeSO4, 0.5; MnSO4, 0.16; ZnSO4, 0.14; Tween 80, 2%.
The flasks were autoclaved at 15lbs for 15 minutes and inoculated with mycelial mat of Aspergillus
niger. The same process was followed for both the chemically pretreated biomass and the untreated
biomass.
Saccharifiation of Spirogyra biomass by Aspergillus niger:
For the saccharification of algal biomass developed mycelial mat of Aspergillus niger was used.
Aspergillus niger is cellulolytic and amylolytic in nature as it produces cellulases and amylases. These
enzymes hydrolyze the cellulose and starch present in Spirogyra and releases free sugars. The
saccharification was carried out for a period of six days at 300C and the process was monitored every
24 hrs for sugars released by the method of Miller D.L., (37).
Fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae:
After six days of saccharifiation mycelial mat of Aspergillus niger was removed under aseptic
conditions and 10% of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was added to the flasks for fermentative production
of bioethanol. The process was carried out for a period of another six days at 300C during which every
24 hours samples were taken for the estimation of alcohol (bioethanol) by the method of Caputi et al.,
(38).
Results & Discussion:
The alga Spirogyra biomass was selected as a substrate for bioethanol (ethanol) production in the
present work as it is rich in polysaccharides- starch and cellulose. Since the industrially used
Saccharomyces cerevisiae is non celluolytic and non amylolytic in nature, the fungal culture A.niger
was employed to hydrolyse and produce simple sugars which can be directly utilized by
Saccharomyces cerevisiae for ethanol production. The processed Spirogyra biomass was pre-treated
with a weak alkali instead of acid, as acid pre-treatment results in production of toxic substances
which decreases the fermentation efficiency of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Enzyme hydrolysis is a
natural and ideal method for conversion of cellulose materials to sugars which could be used as a
source of food, fuel or chemicals Martin. et al., (39). Hence in the present study Aspergillus niger

ISSN: 0975-5462

7048

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
was used as a source of cellulase enzyme for saccharification of Spirogyra biomass into simple
sugars. As discussed in the material and methods for the present study, ethanol production was
carried out by stationary fermentation method.
Renewable marine resources including macro- and microalgae could be applied to convert to energy
and chemical compounds. Previous work, reported that as applications of renewable marine
resources, methane production using marine microalgae biomass (40) and method utilizing floating
ceramic supports for the cultivation of marine microalgae have been developed to take advantage of
this vast resource (41). Applications utilizing a large surface area of an ocean can produce vast
amounts of marine biomass and useful material.
Chemical analysis of Spirogyra biomass: Spirogyra biomass was subjected to the estimation of total
sugars, reducing sugars and cellulose content. The contents of sugars and cellulose are shown in
Table-1.

Table-1- Chemical composition of Spirogyra biomass

Components

Composition based on dry cell

Analytical method

mass (% w/w)
Cellulose

19 %

Spectrophotometric method of
Sadasivam et al., 1992

Total sugars

4.2%

Spectrophotometric method of
Hedge et al., 1962

Reducing sugars

2.7%

Spectrophotometric method of
Krishnaveni et al., 1984

Saccharification and ethanol production from untreated Spirogyra biomass:

Using the fungi Aspergillus niger, a source for starch and cellulose hydrolysis, a saccharification process
was performed under optimal conditions. The degree of saccharification was evaluated by the amount of
sugar released by the liquefaction of starch and cellulose by the method of Miller, G.L. (1972). The
effective usefulness of the pre-treated Spirogyra biomass as a medium for yeast growth was further
estimated by checking the ethanol production by the method of Caputi et al. (1968). The results of sugar
released are shown in Table-2 and Figure-1 and the amount of ethanol produced is shown in Table-3 and
Figure-2. The highest sugar was released on 6th day of saccharification in all the flasks with distilled water,
lactose and synthetic media. Accordingly the amount of bioethanol produced was also more on the 6th day.
The trend of sugar released and bioethanol produced gradually increased from 1st day to 6th day with slight
fluctuations except with lactose where the highest quantity of sugar was released on the 1st day and
gradually decreased up to 6th day leading to highest bioethanol production on the 1st day and lowest on the
6th day indicating that lactose is acting as inducer for cellulase activity, hence more sugar was released on
the 1st day leading to highest production of bioethanol. This trend gradually decreased as the quantity of
lactose decreased from 1st day to 6th day. In both cases trend indicates that production of bioethanol was
directly proportional to availability of sugar for fermentation.

ISSN: 0975-5462

7049

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
Table-2 BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION BY STATIONARY METHOD FROM UN-TREATED SUBSTRATE (Sugar released g/100g)

SUBSTRATE

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

Spirogyra Biomass
With Distilled Water

2.5g

5.0g

7.0g

7.5g

15.0g

19.0g

Spirogyra Biomass
With Synthetic media

9.0g

10.0g

14.0g

16.0g

15.5g

20.0g

Spirogyra Biomass
With Lactose

19.5g

17.0g

12.0g

10.5g

8.5g

5.0g

Figure-2

ISSN: 0975-5462

7050

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054

Table-3
BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION BY STATIONARY METHOD FROM UN-TREATED SUBSTRATE (ETHANOL PRODUCED g/100g)

SUBSTRATE

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Distilled
Water

0.15g

0.35g

0.80g

0.93g

1.27g

1.92g

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Synthetic
media

0.23g

0.78g

2.43g

2.67g

5.80g

8.0g

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Lactose

7.0g

5.9g

3.5g

1.8g

1.0g

0.3g

Figure- 3

Saccharification and ethanol production from chemically pre-treated Spirogyra biomass:

In these sets of experiments, also Aspergillus niger was used for saccharification of Spirogyra biomass and
Saccharomyces cerevisiae was used for fermentative production of bioethanol as these two organisms were proved
very promising in the present study and also in the previous study. In stationary fermentation with chemically
treated Spirogyra biomass, highest sugar released was observed on the 5th day of saccharification in all flasks
containing distilled water, lactose and synthetic media. Accordingly the alcohol was also produced more on the 5th
day of fermentation.

ISSN: 0975-5462

7051

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054

Table-4
BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION BY STATIONARY METHOD FROM PRE-TREATED SUBSTRATE (Sugar released g/100g)

SUBSTRATE

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Distilled
Water

3.5g

4.05g

4.25g

4.5g

5.0g

4.25g

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Synthetic
media

3.0g

3.25g

4.0g

5.5g

7.0g

5.0g

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Lactose

5.25g

6.0g

9.0g

13.25g

16.25g

7.0g

Fig 3

ISSN: 0975-5462

7052

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
Table-5
BIOETHANOL PRODUCTION BY STATIONARY METHOD FROM PRE-TREATED SUBSTRATE (ETHANOL PRODUCED g/100g)

SUBSTRATE

DAY1

DAY2

DAY3

DAY4

DAY5

DAY6

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Distilled
Water

1.0g

1.20g

1.27g

1.71g

3.86g

1.42g

Spirogyra
Biomass With
Synthetic
media
Spirogyra
Biomass With
Lactose

1.59g

1.95g

2.50g

3.32g

3.64g

3.15g

0.85g

0.66g

0.62g

0.46g

0.35g

0.23g

Fig 4

Conclusion:
From the present study it can be concluded that algal biomass is more beneficial raw material than agrobased raw
materials for bioethanol production as it is available abundantly in fresh water as well as marine eco-system and
more importantly it is renewable. The studies also conclude that in general, pretreatment with chemicals are not
required for the algal material particularly for Spirogyra. In practice chemical treatments were employed to remove
or denature unwanted materials (biomass) which are present along with cellulose and starch in agriculturally based
raw materials which are extensively used in bioethanol production. As Spirogyra cell wall is made up of pure
cellulose and simple starch it is not demanding any type of pretreatment. In fact pretreatment will damage the
cellulose leading to less yield of alcohol when compared with untreated spirogyra biomass (Table-5 and Figure 4).
Further it paves the way for less expensive method by cutting off the pretreatment cost.
REFERENCES:
[1]

Brennan, L, Owende, P. (2010) Biofuels from microalgae- a review of technologies for production, processing and extractions of Biofuels
and co-products. Renew sustain. Energy Rev.14, 557-577.

ISSN: 0975-5462

7053

Fuad Salem Eshaq et. al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7045-7054
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]

[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]

Schenk, P., Thomas- Hall, S., Stephens E., Marx, U., Mussgnug, J., Posten, C., Kruse, O., Hankamer, B. (2008). Second generation
Biofuels: high efficiency microalgae for biodiesel production.. Bioenergy Res. 1, 20-43.
Prasad, S., Singh, A., Jain, Joshi, H.C. (2007a). Ethanol production from sweet sorghum syrup for utilization as automotive fuel in India.
Energy fuels 21, 2415-2420.
Prasad, S., Singh, A., Joshi, H.C. (2007b). Ethanol as an alternative fuel from agricultural, industrial and urban residues. Resour. Conserv.
Recycle. 50, 1-39.
Singh, A., Pant, D., Korres, N.E., Nizami, A.S., Prasad, S., Murphy, J.D. (2010a). Key issues in life cycle assessment of ethanol production
from lignocellulosic biomass: challenges and perspectives, Biorsour. Technol. 101, 5003-5013.
Singh, A. Smyth, B.M. Murphy, J.D. (2010b). A biofuel strategy for Ireland with an emphasis on production of biomethane and
Minimization of land-take. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.14, 277-288
Chiaramonti, D. (2007). Bioethanol: role and production technologies. In :Ranalli, P. (Ed.), Improvement of Crop Plants for Industrial End
Uses, pp.209-251.
Champagne, P. (2007). Feasibility of producing bioethanol from waste residues: a Canadian perspective feasibility of producing bioethanol
from waste residues in Canada. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 50,211-230.
Petrou, C.E., Pappis, P.C. (2009). Biofuels: a survey on pros and cons. Energy Fuel 23, 1055-1066.
Lynd, L.R., van zyl, W.H., McBride, J.E., Laser, M. (2005). Consolidated bioprocessing of cellulosic biomass: an update. Curr. Opin.
Biotechnol. 16, 577-583.
Korres, N, E., Singh, A., Nizami, A.S., Murphy, J.D. (2010). Is grass biomethane a sustainable transport biofuel? Biofuels. Bioprod. Bioref.
4, 310-325.
Carere, C.R., Sparling, R., Cicek, N., Levin, D.B. (2008). Third generation Biofuels via direct cellulose fermentation. Int. J. Mol. Sci.9,
1342-1360.
Pant, D., Bogaert, G.V., Diels, L, Vanbroekhoven, K. (2010). A review of the substrates used in microbial fuel cells (MFCs) for sustainable
energy production. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 1533-1543.
Yuan, J.S., Tiller, K.H., Al-Ahmad, H., Stewart Jr., C.N. (2008). Plants to power: bioenergy to fuel the future. Trends Plant Sci. 13, 421429.
Escobar, J.C., Lora, E.S., Venturini, O.J., Yanez, E.F., Almazan, O., Biofuels: environment, technology and food security. Renew. Sustain.
(2009). Energy Rev. 13, 1275- 1287.
IEA, 2007. World Energy Outlook 2007. International Energy Agency, Paris. Illman, A., Scragg. A., Shales, S., Increase in Chlorella strains
calorific values when grown in low nitrogen medium.( 2000). Enzyme Microb. Technol.27, 631-635.
Nigam, P.S., Singh, A. (2010).
Production of liquid Biofuels from renewable resources. Progress Energ. Combust. Sci.
doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2010.01.003.
Sims. R.E.H, Mabee, W., Saddler, J.N., Taylor, M. (2010). An overview of second generation biofuel technologies. Biorsour. Technol. 101,
1570- 1580.
Chen, P., Min, M., Chen, Y., Wang, L., Li, Y., Chen, Q., Wang, C., Wan, Y., Wang, X., Cheng, Y., Deng, S., Hennessy, K., Lin, X., Liu,
Y., Wang,Y., Martinez, B., Ruan, R. (2009). Review of the biological and engineering aspects of algae to fuels approach. Int. J. Agric Biol.
Eng. 2, 1-30.
Borowitzaka, M.A. (2008). Marine and halophilic algae for the production of Biofuels. J. Biotechnol. 136,57.
Waltz, E. (2009). Biotechs green gold? Nat. Biotechnol.27, 15-18.
Mata, T.M., Martins, A.A., Caetano, N.S. (2010). Microalgae for biodiesel production and other applications: a review. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 14, 217-232.
Vunjak-Novakovic, G., Kim, Y., Wu, X., Berzin, I., Merchuk, J.C. (2005). Air-lift bioreactors for algae growth on flue gas: mathematical
modeling and pilot- plant studies. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.44, 6154-6163.
de Morais, G.M., Costa, J.A. (2007). Biofixation of carbon dioxide by Spirullina Sp. and Scendesmus obliquus cultivated in a three- stage
serial tubular photobioreactor. J. Biotechnol.129, 439-445.
Ratledge, C., Cohen, Z. (2008). Microbial and algal oils: do they have a future for biodiesel or as commodity oils? Lipid Technol.20, 155160.
Falkowski, P.G., Katz. M.E., Knoll, A.H., Quigg. A., Schofield, O., Taylor, F.J.R. (2004). The evolution of modern eukaryotic
phytoplankton. Science 305, 354-360.
Huntley, M., Redalje, D.G. (2007). CO2 mitigation and renewable oil from photosynthetic microbes: a new appraisal. Mitigat. Adapt Start.
Global Change 12 573-608.
Rosenberg, J.N., Oyler, G.A., Wilkinson, L., Betenbaugh, M.J. (2008). A green light for engineered algae: redirecting metabolism to fuel a
biotechnology revolution. Biotechnology 19, 430-436.
Subhadra, B., Edwards, M. (2010). An integrated renewable energy park approach for algal biofuel production in United States. Energy
Policy. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.04.036.
Ueda,R., Hirayama,S., Sugata,K., Nakayama, H., (1996). Process for the production of ethanol from microalgae. US Patent 5,578,472.
Smith, G.M. The Freshwater Algae of the United States, McGraw- Hill Book Company, INC,1950, pp.299-302.
Gharphuray, MM., Lee, YH., Fan, LT. (1983). Structural modification of lignocellulosic by treatement to enhance enzymatic hydrolysis.
Biotechnol. 25, 157-170.
Solomon, BO., Amigun, B., Betikue, TV., Ojumu, T., Layokun, SK. (1999). Optimization of cellulase production by Aspergillus flavus
Linn. Isolates NSPR 101 grown on bagasse. JNSCHE. 18: 61-68.
Hedge,J.E and Hofreiter, B.T (1962). In: Carbohydrates Chemisrty,17, (eds. Whistler, R.L and BeMiller, JN.) Academic Press, New York.
Krishnaveni, S.,Theymoli Balasubramanian and S.Sadasivam, (1984).Food Chem.15,229.
Sadasivam, S. and A. Manickam, (1992). In : Biochemical methods for Agricultural sciences , Willey Eastern Limited, New Delhi pp.5-11.
Miller, D. L. (1959). Use of Dinitrosaliylic acid as reagent of reducing sugars. Anal. Chem. 31, 426-428.
Caputi A. Veda, M., and Brown, T. (1968). Spectrophotometric determination of ethanol in wine. American. J. Enol. Viticul. 19: 160-165.
Martin, S.R. (1982). The production of fuel ethanol from carbohydrates, Chemical Engineering, 50.
Matsunaga, T. and Izumida, H. (1984), Biotechnol. Bioeng. Symp. 14, 407-418.
Matsumoto, M., Yoshida, E., Takeyama, H., and Matsunaga, T. (2000), Appl. Biochem. Biotech. 84/86, 51-57.

ISSN: 0975-5462

7054