See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277621961

The Saccharification of Hazelnut Husks to Produce Bioethanol

Article  in  Energy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects · April 2015
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2011.601794

CITATIONS READS

3 37

2 authors, including:

Selim Ceylan
Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi
28 PUBLICATIONS   376 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Re-engineering the Integrated Biorefinery: Improving Biomass to Biofuel and Sustainable Material Conversions View project

Second-Generation Sustainability: Coal-Biomass Blending for Improving Short-Term Energy Generation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Selim Ceylan on 14 June 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine]
On: 17 April 2015, At: 06:18
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery,

Utilization, and Environmental Effects
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ueso20

The Saccharification of Hazelnut Husks

to Produce Bioethanol
a a
S. Ceylan & S. Ünal
a
Bioengineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Marmara
University, Kadıköy-Istanbul, Turkey
Published online: 01 Apr 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: S. Ceylan & S. Ünal (2015) The Saccharification of Hazelnut Husks to Produce
Bioethanol, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 37:9, 972-979,
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2011.601794

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2011.601794

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015
 Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 37:972–979, 2015
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1556-7036 print/1556-7230 online
DOI: 10.1080/15567036.2011.601794

The Saccharification of Hazelnut Husks to Produce

Bioethanol

S. Ceylan1 and S. Ünal1

Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

1
Bioengineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Marmara University, Kadıköy-Istanbul, Turkey

Biofuels have been produced industrially by fermentation of sugars derived from wheat, corn, sugar
beets, sugar cane, and molasses. But because of economic and environmental issues an efficient
substrate must be used for bioethanol production. Hazelnut husk, a renewable and low-cost natural
recourse, is not used industrially. The objective of this study was to examine the saccharification of
hazelnut husk for the production of fermentable sugars. Hazelnut husks were treated with sulphuric acid
for varying periods (30–90 min), with varying acid concentrations (1–5%, w/w) and sample concentra-
tions (1/5, 1/10, 1/15, 1/20 solid/liquid ratio). The maximum sugar yield of 18.63 ± 0.51% was obtained
with 90 min incubation time, 4% acid concentration, and 1/20 sample concentration. The sugar
composition of the acid hydrolyzed hazelnut husks was analyzed using thin layer chromatography.
Arabinose, glucose, mannose, and xylose were found to be present. Fermentability of the hyrolysate
was also tested.

Keywords: acid hydrolysis, agricultural residues, bioethanol, biomass, fermentation, hazelnut husk

1. INTRODUCTION

An increase in energy consumption due to rapid industrialization and exponential growth in the
population has caused a decline in fossil fuel reserves. Therefore, there is a great interest in
exploring alternative energy sources. Biofuels are attracting growing interest around the world,
and in order to reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on petroleum-based fuels,
some governments have been announcing commitments to bio-fuel programs. The European
Commission has indicated that biomass will play an important role in the future (Balat and Balat,
2009). Bioethanol production from lignocellulosic materials, such as agricultural residues, has
gained interest because of its strategic and economic benefits and attractive characteristics of
lignocellulosic biomass. A variety of biomass feedstocks can be used for bioethanol production,
e.g., mill wastes, urban wastes, agricultural residues, and forest residues (Balat and Balat, 2009;
Mohanty et al., 2009). Among these resources, agricultural residues dominate in terms of tonnage
and afford a renewable and low cost raw material for bioethanol production (Balat and Balat,
2009; Kadam and McMillan, 2003). Current ethanol production processes generally use crops,
such as sugar beet, sugar cane, and corn. Usage of a cheaper and more abundant substrate could
render bioethanol more competitive in comparison to fossil fuels, but processing and usage of the

Address correspondence to Dr. S. Ceylan, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Chemical Engineering Department, 55139,
Samsun, Turkey. E-mail: selimceylan@marmara.edu.tr

972
 SACCHARIFICATION OF HAZELNUT HUSKS FOR BIOETHANOL 973

cheaper substrate is complex, and differs in many aspects from the crop-based ethanol production
(Sanchez et al., 2003). It is also very important to ensure a high degree of utilization of all the
carbohydrate components in the feedstock and to attain a high yield of both glucose and
hemicellulosic sugar (Söderström et al., 2003). However, because of pre-treatment of biomass
feedstock and optimization of the hydrolysis process, there is a lack of cost-competitive bioetha-
nol production process.
Turkey is a major hazelnut producer. The residues of hazelnut are not used industrially. In the
industrial processing of hazelnut crops either for oil or nuts, large amounts of husks are generated.
Because of their large storage volumes, they present a disposal problem. Being basically of
lignocellulosic material, hazelnut husks can be utilized as a renewable and low-cost raw material
for the production of fermentable sugars. This article is a report of the study conducted on
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

saccharification of hazelnut husk as a feedstock for bioethanol fermentation. The effects of acid
hydrolysis on bioconversion of hazelnut husk to sugar at laboratory-scale were investigated. As far
as it is known, no study about the saccharification of hazelnut husk and fermentability of hazelnut
husk hydrolysate has yet been reported.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hazelnut husks (HH), an agricultural residue especially abundant biomass in Turkey, used in
this work were supplied by the growers in northern Turkey at the end of the 2004 harvest.
Chemicals used in this work were supplied by Merck AG (Darmstadt, Germany) and by Sigma
Chem. Ltd. (USA). S. cerevisiae FY23 strain used for ethanol production was kindly supplied
by the Chemical Engineering Department, Bosphourus University, Istanbul, Turkey. HH was
ground and samples were washed twice with tap water and once with distilled water, and
cloth filtered after each washing. The solids were then dried at 70°C overnight to constant
weight.

2.1. Dilute-acid Hydrolysis

The effects of reaction time, sample concentration, and acid concentration on hydrolyses
were investigated. The method described by Sun and Cheng (2005) was modified and used for
dilute acid hydrolyses. The ratio of dry sample (g) to volume of acid solution (ml) was varied
between 1/5 and 1/20, and was defined as sample concentration. Five different acid concentrations,
between 1 and 5% (w %), were studied each for three different hydrolysis periods (30, 60, and 90
min). Hydrolysis of HH was performed at the constant temperature of 121 ± 1°C. After hydrolysis,
each sample was filtered with Whatman no. 5 filter paper to separate the supernatant from the solid
part, and the supernatant was used for reducing sugar analysis. Experiments were performed in
triplicate; mean values are used in the figures shown.

2.2. Fermentability of Hydrolysates

In order to test the fermentability of the hydrolyzate of hazelnut husk, fermentations of hydro-
lyzates by S. cerevisiae FY23 strain were performed in an air-free Biostat Q Benchtop Fermentor
with a vessel of 300 ml. The 24 h preculture was used at 2% (v/v %) for inoculation. The liquid
media used throughout this study for ethanol fermentation was modified YPG medium, 1% yeast
extract, and 2% soy-peptone (Lewandowska and Kujawski, 2007). The hydrolyzates were used as
carbon source. The medium, including glucose equivalent of reducing sugar concentration in
hydrolyzate, was used as control medium. The pH of the medium was adjusted to 5.5 in all
experiments using 2 M NaOH or 1 M HCl solutions. Samples were withdrawn at different time
 974 S. CEYLAN AND S. ÜNAL

intervals and analyzed for growth of S. cerevisiae FY23 strain and ethanol production. Growth of
microorganism was measured at 600 nm by a spectrometer (Perkin Elmer, USA) using medium as
blank. The experiments for growth of S. cerevisiae FY23 strain and ethanol production were
performed in duplicate. Mean values are used in the figures shown.

2.3. Analytical Methods

The reducing sugars in the hydrolyzate were determined by the DNS method (Miller, 1959) at 540
nm using D-glucose as the standard. Sugar yields are expressed in g reducing sugar/g dry mass ×
100. The mono-sugars found in the acid hydrolyzate of HH were determined by thin layer
chromatography (TLC) (Pukl and Prosek, 1990). Standard solutions were prepared using arabi-
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

nose, fructose, glucose, maltose, mannose, rafinose, rhammnose, and xylose. Solutions of sugars
listed above (0.02 g/ml) were obtained by dissolving 0.100 g of sugar in 5 ml 0.02% (w %) sodium
azide. Each solution was diluted to 1/20 by taking 200 μl from the sugar solution and completing it
with 0.02% (w %) sodium azide to 4 ml in a test tube. A TLC layer with 20 cm length marked with
a pencil and 1 μl from each standard sugar solution and hydrolyzate was injected on marked places
using a Hamilton syringe. After the addition of all samples, the layer was dried. The dried layer
was immersed in 85:15 (v/v) acetonitrile-water solution. At the end of the run, the layer was taken
from the solution and dried. The dried layer was placed in the solution again. This procedure was
repeated three times. At the end of the third run, the layer was dried again and dipped in 0.05 g/ml
H2SO4–0.005 g/ml α-naphthol solution once. A wet layer was placed on a hot plate at 110°C for 10
min to visualize the sugar bands. Ethanol concentration in the fermentation media was determined
by using the Ethanol UV-Test Kit of Roche (R-Biopharm, Roche) as described by the manufac-
turer’s instructions.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Acid Hydrolysis

The effects of sample concentration, hydrolysis period, and acid concentration on acid hydrolysis
were investigated by sugar concentration variation in hydrolyzate. The results obtained for the
effects of acid concentration, sample concentration, and hydrolysis period on saccharification of
HH are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
There was an increase in sugar yield (weight of reducing sugar/weight of dry mass, %) with
increasing acid concentration for 30 min hydrolysis period (Figure 1a). The sugar yield increased up
to 4% acid concentration and leveled off at 5% acid concentration. The highest sugar yield of 15.72 ±
0.66% was obtained for 1/20 sample concentration and 4% acid concentration for 30 min hydrolysis
period. For 60 min hydrolysis (Figure 1b) the sugar yield increased from 1 to 2% acid concentration.
After 2% acid concentration, the sugar yield slightly increased for 1/10, 1/15, and 1/20 sample
concentrations up to 4%, but all leveled off at 5% acid concentration, similar to a 30-min hydrolysis
period. The highest sugar yield for 60 min hydrolysis period was 16.24 ± 0.04% for 1/20 sample
concentration and 4% acid concentration. The sugar yield increased with increasing acid concentra-
tion for a 90-min hydrolysis period (Figure 1c). However, it decreased at 5% acid concentration for
all sample concentrations. For 1/5 and 1/15 sample concentrations there was a slight increase from 1
to 2% acid concentration. But for all sample concentrations, sugar yield increased up to 4% acid
concentration and then leveled off at 5% acid concentration. Esteghlalian et al. (1997) report an
increase in sugar yield with increasing acid concentration (up to 1.5%). Sun and Cheng (2005) and
Roberto et al. (2003) also observed an increase in xylose and glucose concentration as the acid
concentration increased. The highest sugar yield for the 90-min hydrolysis period was 18.63 ± 0.51%
 SACCHARIFICATION OF HAZELNUT HUSKS FOR BIOETHANOL 975
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

FIGURE 1 Variation of sugar yield from acid hydrolysis of HH for (a) 30 min, (b) 60 min, and (c) 90 min
incubation period (▲: 1/5; □: 1/10; ●: 1/15; Δ: 1/20 sample concentration).
 976 S. CEYLAN AND S. ÜNAL

20
1% acid conc.
18
2% acid conc.
Sugar yield (w%)

16 3% acid conc.
4% acid conc.
14
5% acid conc.
12

10
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

8
0 30 60 90
Hydrolysis period (min)

FIGURE 2 Variation of sugar yield from acid hydrolysis of HH with different hydrolysis period at 1/20 sample
concentration.

for 1/20 sample concentration and 4% acid concentration. This yield was also the maximum
sugar yield obtained from the acid hydrolysis of HH. The reducing sugar concentration in the
hydrolyzate at this point was 7.0 g/L. The sugar yield increased with decreasing sample concentra-
tion. For 1/20 sample concentration the sugar yield was overall higher than the other sample
concentrations for 30-, 60-, and 90-min hydrolysis periods.
Figure 2 shows the change in sugar yield with hydrolysis period. As the sample concentration
decreased, a better extraction was obtained. Roberto et al. (2003) studied the effect of sample
concentration on sugar yield and they observed similar behavior. For the 1/20 sample concentra-
tion, as the hydrolysis period increases the sugar yield increased for all acid concentrations.
However, the rate of increase in sugar yield with time is higher between 60 to 90 min than that
observed up to 60 min. The best yield 18.63 ± 0.51% was obtained at 4% acid concentrations for
the 90-min hydrolysis period. Sun and Cheng. (2005) observed the increase in sugar yield with
hydrolysis period in their study on both Bermuda grass and rye straw. They obtained the best sugar
yields after the 90-min acid hydrolysis period, in which Liao et al. (2004) also observed the same
behavior on the acid hydrolysis of dairy manure. The decrease in sugar yield in the present study
between 4–5% acid concentration (Figures 1a, 1b, 1c) can be explained by the degradation of
reducing sugars (Choteborska et al. 2004). For example, xylose in the hydrolyzate can be further
degraded to produce furfural. Liao et al. (2004) and Iranmahboob et al. (2002) explained the
decrease in sugar yield with the increase in acid concentration by degradation of hemicellulose and
cellulose. The acid hydrolyzates obtained from HH were in a red/brown color. This is considered to
be due to the dehydrating and oxidizing actions of sulphuric acid on the different hydrolytic
products. Formation of furfural from xylose has been suggested as another reason (Agu et al.,
1997). Liao et al. (2004) also observed the red/brown color of the solutions and suggested that this
color may be due to reaction between reducing sugars and protein.

3.2. Identification of Reducing Sugars

The sugar composition was determined in the acid hydrolyzed HH. Thin layer chromatography
(TLC) was performed to determine the monosugars in the acid hydrolysate of HH and arabinose,
mannose, xylose, and glucose were obtained from hydrolysis of HH. Presence of arabinose,
mannose, xylose, and glucose indicate that the hemicellulosic hydrolysis was achieved in the
saccharification of HH (Hamelinck et al., 2005; Sun and Cheng, 2005). Sinner et al. (1979)
 SACCHARIFICATION OF HAZELNUT HUSKS FOR BIOETHANOL 977

4
(a) Control medium

Acid hydrolyzate medium

3
OD (at 600nm)

1
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

0
0 20 40 60 80
Time (h)

12
(b) Control medium
10
Ethanol concentration (g/L)

Acid hydrolyzate medium

0
0 20 40 60
Time (h)

FIGURE 3 Growth curve of S. cerevisiae FY23 (a) and time course of ethanol production (b) in the acid
hydrolyzate and control medium.

reported that the soluble carbohydrate part of lignocellulosic materials of agricultural residues is
composed of mostly glucose and xylose. Minor constituents are arabinose, galactose, and rham-
nose. Liao et al. (2004) and Saha et al. (2005) also found arabinose, galactose, xylose, and glucose
in their acid hydrolyzates of cellulosic materials. Choteborska et al. (2004) reported that xylose,
arabinose, galactose, and glucose were found in acid hydrolysate of wheat bran.

3.3. Ethanol Production from HH by S. cerevisiae FY23 Strain

Figure 3a shows the growth curve for S. cerevisia FY23 in acid hydrolyzate and its control
medium. S. cerevisiae FY23 reached its stationary phase after 12 h of fermentation and fermenta-
tion was stopped after 54 h. The specific growth rate was 0.2222 h−1 in the acid hydrolyzate
medium while it was 0.1375 h−1 in the control medium. These results are in agreement with those
of Yu and Zhang (2003), who studied ethanol fermentation of acid hydrolyzed cellulosic pyrolyzate
with S. cerevisiae.
The time course of ethanol production using hydrolyzate as substrate and glucose as control are
given in Figure 3b. Ethanol production during the exponential phase was relatively slow but
 978 S. CEYLAN AND S. ÜNAL

increased rapidly after 12 h. Maximum ethanol production was obtained after 28 h in acid
hydrolyzate medium. Ethanol production was 7.65 g/L in acid hydrolyzate medium and 9.20 g/L
in control medium after 28 h. Ethanol concentrations were lower than the control mediums. The
poor fermentability is considered to be primarily due to the presence of toxic components, which
inhibited the growth and fermentation activity of the yeast (Nigam, 2001). Lag phase before the
exponential phase is due to inhibitors also (Palmarola-Adrados et al., 2004). The most important
inhibitors are furfural and 5-hydroxymethyl-2-furaldehyd (HMF). Pentose degradation results in
increased yield of furfural. HMF is the degradation product of hexoses under more severe
pretreatment conditions. These substances were found to be toxic for yeasts; their presence in
the slurry causes insufficient conversion of sugars to ethanol, or even total inhibition of fermenta-
tion (Taherzadeh et al., 2000; Choteborska et al., 2004).
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

4. CONCLUSION

The improvement in bioconversion of wastes into valuable chemicals and fuels will provide
reduced pollution problems and valorization of wastes. Lignocellulosic wastes can be thought as
a major resource for bioethanol production. In this study, hydrolyzates of lignocelluloic waste
biomass hazelnut husk used for bioethanol production. Results showed that his type of waste has a
potential as a resource for bioethanol production.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to thank Prof. Dr. Dilek Kazan for reviewing the manuscript.

FUNDING

This research was funded by Marmara University through the project BSE-071/131102.

REFERENCES

Agu, R. C., Amadife, T. A. E., Ude, C. M., Onyia, A., Ogu, E. O., Okafor, M., and Ezejiofor, E. 1997. Combined heat
treatment and acid hydrolysis of cassava grate waste (CGW) biomass for ethanol production. Waste Manage. 17:91–96.
Balat, M., and Balat, H. 2009. Recent trends in global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel. Appl. Energy
86:2273–2282.
Choteborska, P., Palmarola-Andrados, B., Galbe, M., Zacchi, G., Melzoch, K., and Rychtera, M. 2004. Processing of wheat
bran to sugar solution. J. Food Eng. 61:561–565.
Esteghlalian, A., Hashimoto, A. G., Fenske, J. J., Penner, B., and Penner, M. H. 1997. Modeling and optimization of the
dilute sulfuric-acid pretreatment of corn stover; poplar and switchgrass. Bioresour. Technol. 59:129–136.
Hamelinck C. N., Van Hooijdonk, G., and Pc Faaij, A. 2005. Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass: Techno-economic
performance in short-, middle and long-term. Biomass Bioenergy 28:384–410.
Iranmahboob, J., Nadima, F., and Monemib, S. 2002. Optimizing acid hydrolysis: A critical step for production of ethanol
from mixed wood chips. Biomass Bioenergy 22:401–404.
Kadam, K. L., and McMillan, J. D. 2003. Availability of corn stover as a sustainable feedstock for bioethanol production.
Bioresour. Technol. 88:17–25.
Lewandowska, M., and Kujawski, W. 2007. Ethanol production from lactose in a fermentation/pervaporation system.
J. Food Eng. 79:430–437.
Liao, W., Liu, Y., Liu, C., and Chen, S. 2004. Optimizing dilute acid hydrolysis of hemicellulose in a nitrogen-rich cellulosic
material dairy manure. Bioresour. Technol. 94:33–41.
Miller, G. L. 1959. Use of dinitrosalicylic acid reagent for determination of reducing sugar. Analitic Chem. 31:426–428.
 SACCHARIFICATION OF HAZELNUT HUSKS FOR BIOETHANOL 979

Mohanty, S. M., Behera, S., Swain, M. R., and Ray, R. C. 2009. Bioethanol production from mahula (Madhuca latifolia L.)
flowers by solid-state fermentation. Appl. Energy 86:640–644.
Nigam, J. N. 2001. Ethanol production from wheat straw hemicelluloses hydrolysate by Pichia stipitis. J. Biotechnol.
87:17–27.
Palmarola-Adrados, B., Galbe, M., Zacchi, G., Melzoch, K., and Choteborska, M. R. 2004. Processing of wheat bran to
sugar solution. J. Food Eng. 61:561–565.
Pukl, M., and Prosek, M. 1990. Rapid quantative TLC analysis of sugars using improved commonly used solvent system.
J. Planar Chromat. 3:173–176.
Roberto, I. C., Mussatto, S. I., and Rodrigues, R. L. B. 2003. Dilute-acid hydrolysis for optimization of xylose recovery
from rice straw in a semi pilot reactor. Ind. Crop Prod. 17:171–176.
Saha, B. C., Iten, L. B., Cotta, M. A., and Wu, Y. V. 2005. Dilute acid pretreatment; enzymatic saccharification and
fermentation of wheat straw to ethanol. Proc. Biochem. 40:3693–3700.
Downloaded by [Ondokuz Mayis Universitesine] at 06:18 17 April 2015

Sanchez, L. P., Christian, R., Tobias, M., Mats, G., and Gunnar, L. 2003. Dilute-acid hydrolysis for fermentation of the
Bolivian straw material Paja Brava gladys. Bioresour. Technol. 93:249–256.
Sinner, M., Puls, J., and Hamburg, R. 1979. Carbohydrate composition of nut shells and some other agricultural residues.
Starch/Stärke 31:267–269.
Söderström, J., Pilcher, L., Galbe, M., and Zacchi, G. 2003. Two-step steam pretreatment of softwood by dilute H2SO4
ımpregnation for ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy 24:475–486.
Sun, Q. Y., and Cheng, J. J. 2005. Dilute acid pretreatment of rye straw and Bermuda grass for ethanol production.
Bioresour. Technol. 96:1599–1606.
Taherzadeh, M. J., Gustafsson, Á. L., Niklasson, C., and Lideâ, G. N. 2000. Physiological effects of 5-hydroxymethylfur-
fural on Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl. Microbiol. Biot. 53:701–708.
Yu, Z., and Zhang, H. 2003. Ethanol fermentation of acid-hydrolyzed cellulosic pyrolysate with Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Bioresour. Technol. 90:95–100.

View publication stats