Citation: Thatiane Rodrigues Mota, Dyoni Matias de Oliveira, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley Dantas dos Santos. Plant cell wall composition and enzymatic deconstruction[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2018, 5(1): 63-77. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2018.1.63
| [1] | Noaa Frederick, Mengxing Li, Danielle Julie Carrier, Michael D. Buser, Mark R. Wilkins . Switchgrass storage effects on the recovery of carbohydrates after liquid hot water pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis. AIMS Bioengineering, 2016, 3(3): 389-399. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2016.3.389 |
| [2] | Adam B Fisher, Stephen S Fong . Lignin biodegradation and industrial implications. AIMS Bioengineering, 2014, 1(2): 92-112. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2014.2.92 |
| [3] | Egidio Viola, Francesco Zimbardi, Vito Valerio, Antonio Villone . Effect of Ripeness and Drying Process on Sugar and Ethanol Production from Giant Reed (Arundo donax L.). AIMS Bioengineering, 2015, 2(2): 29-39. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2015.2.29 |
| [4] | Siseon Lee, Robert J. Mitchell . Perspectives on the use of transcriptomics to advance biofuels. AIMS Bioengineering, 2015, 2(4): 487-506. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2015.4.487 |
| [5] | Christopher N. Boyer, T. Edward Yu, Burton C. English, James A. Larson, Nicole Labbé, Lindsey M. Kline . Impact of an innovated storage technology on the quality of preprocessed switchgrass bales. AIMS Bioengineering, 2016, 3(2): 125-138. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2016.2.125 |
| [6] | Xiu Zhang, Nhuan P. Nghiem . Pretreatment and Fractionation of Wheat Straw for Production of Fuel Ethanol and Value-added Co-products in a Biorefinery. AIMS Bioengineering, 2014, 1(1): 40-52. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2014.1.40 |
| [7] | Zongyuan Zhu, Rachael Simister, Susannah Bird, Simon J. McQueen-Mason, Leonardo D. Gomez, Duncan J. Macquarrie . Microwave assisted acid and alkali pretreatment of Miscanthus biomass for biorefineries. AIMS Bioengineering, 2015, 2(4): 449-468. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2015.4.449 |
| [8] | Mohamed Neifar, Rim Chatter, Habib Chouchane, Raya Genouiz, Atef Jaouani, Ahmed Slaheddine Masmoudi, Ameur Cherif . Optimization of enzymatic saccharification of Chaetomorpha linum biomass for the production of macroalgae-based third generation bioethanol. AIMS Bioengineering, 2016, 3(3): 400-411. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2016.3.400 |
| [9] | Lindsey M. Kline, Nicole Labbé, Christopher Boyer, T. Edward Yu, Burton C. English, James A. Larson . Investigating the impact of biomass quality on near-infrared models for switchgrass feedstocks. AIMS Bioengineering, 2016, 3(1): 1-22. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2016.1.1 |
| [10] | Dyoni M. de Oliveira, Victor Hugo Salvador, Thatiane R. Mota, Aline Finger-Teixeira, Rodrigo F. de Almeida, Douglas A. A. Paixão, Amanda P. De Souza, Marcos S. Buckeridge, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Fabio M. Squina, Wanderley D. dos Santos . Feruloyl esterase from Aspergillus clavatus improves xylan hydrolysis of sugarcane bagasse. AIMS Bioengineering, 2017, 4(1): 1-11. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2017.1.1 |
Ara: arabinose; FA: ferulic acid; Fuc: fucose; Gal: galactose; Glc: glucose; GlcA: glucuronic acid; Man: mannose; Xyl: xylose
Currently, our energy is mainly derived from oil reserves. These fossil resources are finite and therefore our economy is unsustainable in the long term. Besides, the intensive and increasing burning of fossil reserves since the industrial revolution has introduced an excessive amount of CO2 into the atmosphere and increased the temperature of the planet. These factors demand the development of technologies that allow us to exploit sustainable energy sources to ensure sustainable economic development [1,2]. Lignocellulosic biomass is the most abundant renewable raw material in nature. The production of plant biomass in the world is about 200 × 109 tons per year and over 90% of this biomass is lignocellulose [3,4] and has the potential to replace oil in a reasonable scenario of technological development [5]. Currently, sugarcane and maize are the main crops used in the production of ethanol [6] starting from soluble carbohydrates as sucrose and starch [7].
Due to its long history of sugarcane production, Brazil is prominent in the use of biomass to produce ethanol [8]. Bioethanol can be an alternative to gasoline [9]. The United States is currently the main producer of ethanol in the world, primarily using corn starch, while Europe uses wheat starch and sugar beet. In 2013, the total production of ethanol by the United States was 50.3 billion liters [9]. The global production of biofuels was 18.2 billion liters in 2000, 60.6 billion liters in 2007 and 85 billion liters in 2011 [3]. Therefore, almost all ethanol produced in the world today comes from soluble carbohydrates such as sucrose and starch [7].
The global demand for biofuels quadrupled between 2000 and 2008. In 2000, the production of biofuel was 400 petajoule (PJ) per year and in 2008 was nearly 1800 PJ per year [10], justifying investments in the development of technologies to increase ethanol production [11,12,13]. The bioethanol production from sugar feedstock is called “first generation ethanol”. Second generation ethanol is made by saccharification of lignocellulosic feedstock as agricultural wastes [3].
In sugarcane plants, after extraction of the soluble carbohydrates, the residual biomass is burned to sustain the energy demands of the industry [14]. Surplus of biomass is usually converted into electricity and sold to distributors or, less commonly, used as cattle feed [15]. As this residual biomass is essentially composed of carbohydrates, it could be partially converted into ethanol, contributing to increased productivity, without competing with food production [16]. Therefore, different sources of lignocellulosic biomass have high potential for bioenergy, mainly monocots plants—rice, wheat, sorghum, tall fescue, giant reed and elephant grass; and some eudicots—poplar, eucalyptus and rapeseed [17].
However, in contrast to the processing of sucrose and starch, degradation of lignocellulosic biomass demands a sophisticated set of enzymes. The complexity of the carbohydrate polymers and their cross-linkages with lignin demands a complex set of enzymes in order to allow the access of polysaccharidases and release fermentable sugars [18]. Lignocellulose is basically composed of plant cell wall components. The recalcitrance of cell walls to enzyme digestion is the result of long-range co-evolution among plants and their predators [19].
Microorganisms and herbivores promote the enzymatic degradation of lignocellulose via multiple carbohydrate-active, lignin-active and accessory enzymes, which typically act together with complementary and synergistic activities [20]. The industrial conversion of lignocellulosic materials into ethanol typically involves: (i) physical or chemical pretreatments to disrupt polymer interactions and make cellulose and hemicellulose more accessible for enzymatic hydrolysis; (ii) saccharification of pretreated biomass by enzyme complexes including cellulases, hemicellulases and accessory enzymes; (iii) fermentation of monosaccharides to produce ethanol or other platform chemicals [21].
However, the technology to produce cellulosic ethanol is still under development and to make the process competitive in terms of cost, it is necessary to improve the efficiency of lignocellulosic degradation [22]. We therefore need to enhance our knowledge about cell wall organization and its enzymatic breakdown. The review describes the basic information about chemical composition of lignocellulosic biomass and the enzymatic arsenal for lignocellulose deconstruction into fermentable sugars.
Lignocellulose biomass can be divided into polysaccharide—cellulose, hemicellulose and pectin—and non-polysaccharide fractions—lignin, phenolic compounds and proteins [23]. Plant tissues vary widely in structure and composition. The composition and architecture of cell walls vary according to species, cell type, tissue, developmental stage and cell wall layer [24,25]. During plant growth and cell elongation, plant cells produce a primary cell wall, which typically contains cellulose, hemicellulose, pectin and proteins [26]. The primary cell walls of grasses and eudicots share some similarities (i.e. a cellulose fraction embedded in a non-cellulosic fraction) with differences in the abundance and type of different components (Figure 1). After cell elongation, some tissues produce a secondary cell wall, which is deposited inside the primary cell wall, displacing it outwards. The secondary cell wall is a prominent feature of fibers, such as xylem and sclerenchyma. Secondary cell walls are composed of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin [27,28].
Cellulose, the most abundant biopolymer, consists of D-glucose units connected to each other by glycoside β-1,4 linkages, with cellobiose as the fundamental repeating unit (Figure 1a), synthesized by cellulose synthase complex [29]. Cellulose chains show an exceptionally high degree of polymerization, with lengths of 2,000 to 25,000 glucose residues [16,30]. These cellulose molecules are interconnected in parallel by hydrogen bonds, generating microfibrils comprising 30 to 36 linear chains, which have a high degree of mechanical resistance and recalcitrance against enzyme attack [31].
The cellulose microfibrils are cross-linked by hemicellulose molecules (also known as cross-linking glycans; Figure 1b-1e). Hemicellulose also impedes the collapse of cellulose microfibrils, preventing the microfibrils from sliding over each other [32]. Finally, the cellulose-hemicellulose network is embedded in a matrix of pectin that may contain lignin [29]. Hemicelluloses are the second major polysaccharide fraction of the cell wall [33].
Compared with cellulose, hemicelluloses are of lower molecular weight, comprising 100 to 200 monomeric units. The backbone of hemicellulose is mainly composed of hexoses (such as D-glucose and D-mannose) or pentoses (such as D-xylose) connected to each other by β-1,4 linkages. Except for β-1,3; β-1,4 mixed linkage glucans found exclusively in grasses, hemicelluloses are heteropolysaccharides presenting different monosaccharides (such as D-galactose, D-fucose, arabinose and D-glucuronic acid) attached to the backbone core [28].
Xyloglucan is the main hemicellulose in eudicots and non-commelinid monocots. It consists of a β-1,4-D-glucose backbone regularly branched by α-(1,6)-linked xylosyl residues, which may be further connected to galactosyl, arabinosyl and fucosyl residues, formally named fucogalactoxyloglucans (Figure 1b) [34].
The main hemicelluloses in eudicots are xyloglucans, xylans and mannans [16]. Xylan is a major hemicellulosic component in grasses, consisting of a β-1,4-linked D-xylose backbone exhibiting different patterns of branching with arabinose and glucuronic acid (Figure 1c). Glucuronoarabinoxylan (GAX) may present hydroxycinnamic acids such as ferulic acid and p-coumaric acid, ester-linked to arabinosyl residues of the GAX structure [35].
Mixed-linkage glucans, also simply called β-glucans, are unbranched homopolymers of glucose, alternating short sequences of β-1,4-glucan with single β-1,3-glucans (Figure 1d). β-Glucans are unique to the cell walls of grasses (family Poaceae) and a few related families from the order Poales [28]. The content of β-glucans in vegetative cells is highly correlated with cell growth and expansion, suggesting that β-glucan plays a role in this phase [36].
Mannan is the third most important kind of hemicellulose. Mannans and glucomannans are the main hemicelluloses in charophytes. Their backbones consist of β-1,4-linked mannose, e.g. mannans and galactomannans; or include both mannose and glucose in a non-repeating pattern, as in glucomannans and galactoglucomannans (Figure 1e) [37].
Figure 1. Schematic structures of cellulose and hemicelluloses.Pectin is the most complex class of structural polysaccharides, consisting of branched heteropolysaccharides presenting acidic sugars (galacturonic and glucuronic acid) and neutral sugars (rhamnose, galactose and arabinose). Abundant in the middle lamella and in primary plant cell walls [38], it is involved in intercellular adhesion, confers charge and preserves the water content of plant cell walls. Pectin also contributes to the integrity and rigidity of plant tissues and is important in defense mechanisms against pathogens [39]. Pectin is used in the food, cosmetic and drugs industries, e.g. in paper substitutes and biodegradable films [40]. Plant primary cell walls contain approximately 30% pectin in dicotyledonous and non-commelinid monocot plants, while lower levels (2%-10%) are found in grasses and other commelinid plants [39,40].
Pectin contains different monosaccharides, the most abundant being galacturonic acid [38]. Homogalacturonan (HG) is the most abundant pectic polysaccharide. It consists of a linear homogeneous polymer of α-1,4 linked galacturonic acid [40]. Other abundant types of pectin are xylogalacturonan, apiogalacturonan, rhamnogalacturonan I and rhamnogalacturonan II [39].
Lignin is the most abundant non-polysaccharide fraction of lignocellulose and the second most abundant biopolymer, after cellulose. It consists of a complex phenolic polymer linked to cellulose and hemicellulose [41]. Corresponding to 15% - 40% of dry weight [42], lignin is present in the plant secondary cell walls of specialized tissues (fibers, vessel, cortex and so on), where it interacts with cellulosic microfibrils, interrupting cell growth and providing mechanical strength to the plant and chemical resistance against pathogens, herbivores and abiotic stresses [43,44].
Lignin is produced by the phenylpropanoid pathway [45], which begins in the cytosol with the deamination of L-phenylalanine to produce cinnamic acid, a reaction catalyzed by phenylalanine ammonia-lyase [46,47]. Afterwards, hydroxylation of the aromatic ring produces p-coumaric acid, the first phenylpropanoid in the pathway. Following further hydroxylations and methoxylations at C-3 and C-5 of the aromatic ring, and reduction of the carboxylic acid to an alcohol, these intermediates are converted to three different hydroxycinnamyl alcohols: p-coumaryl, coniferyl and sinapyl alcohols, see Figure 2 ,48,49,50].
Specific cell wall peroxidases promote an oxidative polymerization of monolignols resulting in a highly hydrophobic matrix of C-C and C-O-C. The monolignol residues in lignin polymers may be identified by their ring decoration, and are referred to as p-hydroxyphenyl (H), guaiacyl (G) and syringyl (S) units, respectively [51,52]. The incorporation of monolignols H, G and S in a growing lignin polymer occur via mutual coupling and cross-coupling of monolignols by inter-linkage β-O-4 (β-ether), β-5 phenylcoumaran, β-β resinol and 4-O-5 biphenyl ether [48].
Figure 2. Structural components of lignin polymers. The biosynthetic precursors, coniferyl (blue), coniferyl (green) and sinapyl (red) alcohols are shown, as well as p-coumarate ester conjugated lignin (gray). The linkages specifically formed by radical coupling reactions are shown in bold and labeled with the type of unit produced in the polymer.Different types and large quantities of enzymes are necessary to release fermentable sugars from cell wall components. Table 1 presents different types of enzymes used for the breakdown of cellulose and hemicellulose [53]. Enzymes that modify complex carbohydrates are known as Carbohydrate-Active EnZymes (CAZymes). Collectively they are organized into families: Glycoside hydrolases (GHs), glycosyl transferases (GT), polysaccharide lyases (PL), carbohydrate esterases (CE), and auxiliary activities (AA). The latter group includes oxidative enzymes, such as cellobiose dehydrogenase (CDH) and lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase (LPMO) that are involved in polysaccharide degradation [54,55]. Many CAZymes are modular proteins, consisting of catalytic modules and non-catalytic carbohydrate-binding modules (CBMs) [56,57]. CBMs have an important role in crystalline cellulose degradation and are also found in enzymes that act on glucans, xylans, mannans and glucomannans [57]. CBMs promote the association of enzymes with substrates, potentiating the action of cellulolytic enzymes on insoluble substrates [58,59,60].
Cellulases are the primary enzymes used for cellulose hydrolysis. Deconstruction of cellulose is achieved by three predominant activities: Cellobiohydrolase (also called exoglucanase), endoglucanase and β-glucosidase. They act synergistically in the hydrolysis of the cellulose, which reduces problems of product inhibition [21]. Endoglucanases (EC 3.2.1.4) cleave the glycosidic internal bonds of the non-crystalline cellulose portion [61]. Cellobiohydrolases and exoglucanases (EC 3.2.1.91 and EC 3.2.1.176) remove glucose dimers (cellobiose) from the reducing and non-reducing ends of cellulose chains, respectively [62]. The main distinction between cellobiohydrolase and exoglucanase is that cellobiohydrolase releases cellobiose from crystalline cellulose [63]. Finally, β-glucosidases (EC 3.2.1.21) cleave cellobiose into two glucose molecules [64].
The β-1-4-D-glucose backbone of xyloglucans can be hydrolyzed by the cellulases described above, after elimination of the branches containing xylose, galactose and fucose. Enzymes responsible for the hydrolysis of the xyloglucan backbone are xyloglucan endo-β-1,4-glucanases, EC 3.2.1.151 [65]. Different classes of xyloglucanases present affinities for xyloglucans with different degrees of branching [62].
Degradation of xylan backbones requires at least two different enzymes: 1) endoxylanases (EC 3.2.1.8) hydrolyze glycoside linkages from the xylan chain releasing xylooligosaccharides; 2) β-xylosidases (EC 3.2.1.37) hydrolyze xylobiose and xylooligosaccharides from the non-reducing end. The xylanase group of enzymes have different specificities for xylan backbones depending on the kind and degree of branching [66]. α-Arabinofuranosidases (EC 3.2.1.55) act on α-glycosidic bonds of arabinofuranoses (Araf) branching from the xylan backbone [67,68], while α-glucuronidases (EC 3.2.1.139) hydrolyze xylan linked with glucuronic acid [69]. Acetyl xylan esterases (EC 3.1.1.72) remove acetyl groups [70,71], and feruloyl esterases (EC 3.1.1.73) hydrolyze ester-linked ferulic and p-coumaric acids attached to Araf branches in xylan chains and pectin [72,73]. Feruloyl esterases present synergistic actions with xylanase, β-glucosidase, arabinofuranosidase and other accessory enzymes in the degradation of cell walls [74,75]. These synergies may reduce the quantity of enzyme necessary for saccharification and reduce the costs of bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass [76,77]. The enzymatic saccharification system using feruloyl esterase combined with accessory enzymes could contribute to the production of fermentable sugars for bioethanol production [35].
The structurally heterogeneous nature of mannans requires associations and synergistic actions among a variety of cleaving enzymes such as endo-β-mannanase (EC 3.2.1.78), exo-β-mannosidase (EC 3.2.1.25), β-glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21), acetyl mannan esterases (EC 3.1.1.6), and α-galactosidase (EC 3.2.1.22) for efficient enzymatic hydrolysis [37]. Endo-β-mannanases, also referred to simply as mannanases, hydrolyze the endo-β-(1,4)-glucose-mannose backbone of galacto(gluco)mannans, releasing predominantly mannobiose and mannotriose. β-Mannosidases hydrolyze β-(1,4)-glucose-mannose, releasing mannose from the non-reducing end of manno-oligosaccharides [37].
Degradation of mixed linked β-glucans is catalyzed by linkage specific β-glucanases. Depending on the type of glycosidic linkage they cleave, β-glucanase is grouped into four main categories, namely β-1,3;1,4-glucanases (lichenases; EC 3.2.1.73), endoglucanases (cellulases; EC 3.2.1.4), β-1,3-glucanases (laminarinases, EC 3.2.1.39) and β-1,3(4)-glucanases (EC 3.2.1.6) [62].
Pectinases or polygalacturonases (pectin depolymerases) form a heterogeneous group of enzymes with the capacity to hydrolyze α-1,4-glycosidic linkages of pectate present in plant cell walls [78]. Pectins are extremely important for cell wall growth and extension [79]. Pectinases have a potential application in improving ethanol production from various feedstocks, as pectinase treatment requires less energy and produces no inhibitory factors [80,81,82].
| Group of enzymes | Enzymes | Linkages breakdown |
| Cellulases | Cellobiohydrolase | β-(1,4)-Glc |
| Endoglucanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| β-Glucosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Hemicellulases | Endoxylanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Xyl |
| β-Xylosidase | β-(1,4)-Xyl | |
| β-Glucanase/lichenase | β(1,3)-Glc, β(1,4)-Glc | |
| Feruloyl esterase | Ester linkage FA-Ara | |
| p-Coumaroyl esterase | Ester linkage pCA-Ara | |
| Arabinofuranosidase | α-(1,2)-Ara, α-(1,3)-Ara | |
| Glucuronidase | α(1,2)-GlcA | |
| 4-O-Glucuronoyl methylesterase | α-(1,2)-4-O-metil-α-glucuronic | |
| Xyloglucanase | Endo-α-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Fucosidase | α-(1,2)-Fuc | |
| α-Galactosidase | α-(1,3)-Gal, α-(1,6)-Gal | |
| Mannanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| β-Mannosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| Acetyl xylan esterase | α-(1,2)-Xyl |
DownLoad: CSVLigninases are laccase, lignin peroxidase and manganese peroxidase. These enzymes are able to hydrolyze the lignin fraction, improving polysaccharide degradation by glycosyl hydrolases, and reducing the recalcitrance of lignocellulosic biomass, as well as decreasing the adsorption of lignin to enzymes [83].
Laccases (EC 1.10.3.2) are copper-containing enzymes with four copper atoms in the catalytic center [84]. They catalyze the oxidative cleavage of phenolic compounds, producing radicals [12]. Lignin peroxidase (EC 1.11.1.7) and manganese peroxidase (EC 1.11.1.7) are the two largest classes of glycoproteins in the peroxidase group. They present a heme group that requires hydrogen peroxide as an oxidant [12]. Laccases play an important role in lignin biosynthesis. Plant cells secrete peroxidases and laccases into the apoplast for the polymerization of monolignols by radicals [85], while fungi and bacteria secrete them for lignin depolymerization [86].
Lignocellulosic biomass presents several features that confer recalcitrance, such as crystalline cellulose which precludes decomposition by enzymes [87]; highly complex hemicelluloses and pectin, which demands a huge number of enzymes; the high degree of lignin adsorption to proteins that inhibits enzymatic activity [88]; and the complex cross-linkages between phenolic and polysaccharide components [35,89]. Biological, chemical and physical pretreatments can reduce the crystallinity of lignocellulose and break various linkages, drastically reducing its complexity [17].
Biological pretreatments have been widely studied and have demonstrated some advantages over chemical and physical pretreatments such as a low demand for energy, environmental friendliness and low levels of toxic products [90]. Biological pretreatments include in vivo application of microorganisms [91], for example, brown, white and soft rot fungi that produce hydrolytic enzymes such as laccase and manganese peroxidase that degrade lignin [92].
Chemical pretreatments strongly improve the biodegradability of cellulose [93]. In alkali pretreatments, biomass is mixed with bases such as sodium or potassium hydroxides. These pretreatments promote modifications in the cell wall structure and increase enzyme accessibility for saccharification [94]. Acid hydrolysis mostly employs sulfuric acid, but phosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid and nitric acid are also used to remove lignin [95]. In addition, microwave energy has been applied to facilitate alkaline and acid pretreatments [96]. Pretreatments that use organic solvents are known as organosolv and utilize aliphatic alcohols, polyols (e.g. glycerol), acetone or phenol as solvents to promote delignification. Organic solvents improve removal of lignin content and reduce the viscosity of the pretreatment medium [97].
Physical pretreatments are used to enhance lignocellulosic porosity. Milling procedures are the most traditional physical pretreatment used in laboratories [98]. Although effective, milling is energy intensive and only mild milling procedures have been shown to be industrially viable. Ultrasonic pretreatment induces mechanical vibrations and cavitations that help to disrupt tissues [99]. One of the most promising pretreatment methods is steam explosion. It consists of compression and fast decompression of the biomass to increase the porosity of the lignocellulosic material and facilitate the access of hydrolytic enzymes. The process has been demonstrated to be efficient for biomasses containing low amounts of lignin [7,94].
The extraction of lignin by pretreatments improves saccharification [100]. Although in principle these treatments are feasible, they still require a substantial technological development to become cost and energy efficient enough for industrial application [7,101].
Lignocellulose has a complex and varied composition that, although reasonably well known, is still a challenge for efficient conversion in biorefineries. Development of technologies that improve the efficiency of generation of biofuels and platform chemicals from lignocellulose has been the focus vigorous scientific efforts. While bioethanol has real potential as an oil replacement, considerable technological advances are necessary to reduce financial and energetic costs and make the biochemical conversion of lignocellulose into biofuels a commercial reality.
This work was supported by grants from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). T. R. Mota is recipient of CAPES and D. M. Oliveira is recipient from CNPq. O. Ferrarese-Filho and W. D. dos Santos are research fellows of CNPq.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
| [1] | Santos WDD, Gómez ED, Buckeridge MS, (2011) Bioenergy and the Sustainable Revolution, In: Buckeridge MS, Goldman GH. Routes to Cellulosic Ethanol. Springer Science and Business Media, LCC, 1 Ed., New York, 15–26. |
| [2] |
Jaiswal D, Souza APD, Larsen S, et al. (2017) Brazilian sugarcane ethanol as an expandable green alternative to crude oil use. Nat Clim Change 7: 788–792. doi: 10.1038/nclimate3410
|
| [3] | Saini JK, Saini R, Tewari L (2015) Lignocellulosic agriculture wastes as biomass feedstocks for second-generation bioethanol production: Concepts and recent developments. Biotech 5: 337–353. |
| [4] | Buckeridge MS, Dos Santos WD, Mas T, et al. (2016) The cell wall architecture of sugarcane and its implications to cell wall recalcitrance, In: Lam E, Carrer H, Da Silva JA, et al. Compendium of Bioenergy Plants: Compendium of Bioenergy Plants, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 31–50. |
| [5] |
Poovaiah CR, Nageswara-Rao M, Soneji JR, et al. (2014) Altered lignin biosynthesis using biotechnology to improve lignocellulosic biofuel feedstocks. Plant Biotechnol J 12: 1163–1173. doi: 10.1111/pbi.12225
|
| [6] |
Torres AF, Visser RGF, Trindade LM (2015) Bioethanol from maize cell walls: Genes, molecular tools, and breeding prospects. GCB Bioenergy 7: 591–607. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12164
|
| [7] |
Balat M (2011) Production of bioethanol from lignocellulosic materials via the biochemical pathway: A review. Energ Convers Manage 52: 858–875. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2010.08.013
|
| [8] |
Souza APD, Leite DCC, Pattathil S, et al. (2013) Composition and structure of sugarcane cell wall polysaccharides: Implications for second-generation bioethanol production. BioEnergy Res 6: 564–579. doi: 10.1007/s12155-012-9268-1
|
| [9] |
Gupta A, Verma JP (2015) Sustainable bio-ethanol production from agro-residues. Renew Sust Energ Rev 41: 550–567. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.032
|
| [10] |
Sims REH, Mabee W, Saddler JN, et al. (2010) An overview of second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresource Technol 101: 1570–1580. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.046
|
| [11] |
Amorim HV, Lopes ML, Oliveira JVC, et al. (2011) Scientific challenges of bioethanol production in Brazil. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 91: 1267–1275. doi: 10.1007/s00253-011-3437-6
|
| [12] | Verardi A, Blasi A, Molino A, et al. (2016) Improving the enzymatic hydrolysis of Saccharum officinarum L. bagasse by optimizing mixing in a stirred tank reactor: Quantitative analysis of biomass conversion. Fuel Process Technol 149: 15–22. |
| [13] |
Limayem A, Ricke SC (2012) Lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production: Current perspectives, potential issues and future prospects. Prog Energy Combust Sci 38: 449–467. doi: 10.1016/j.pecs.2012.03.002
|
| [14] |
Goldemberg J, Coelho ST, Guardabassi P (2008) The sustainability of ethanol production from sugarcane. Energ Policy 36: 2086–2097. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.028
|
| [15] | Rocha GJM, Gonçalves AR, Oliveira BR, et al. (2013) Steam explosion pretreatment reproduction and alkaline delignification reactions performed on a pilot scale with sugarcane bagasse for bioethanol production. Ind Crop Prod 35: 274–279. |
| [16] | Buckeridge MS, Santos WDD, Souza AP, (2010) Routes for cellulosic ethanol in Brazil, In: Cortez LAB. Sugarcane Bioethanol, R&D for productivity and sustainability, Blucher, 992. |
| [17] | Kou L, Song Y, Zhang X, et al. (2017) Comparison of four types of energy grasses as lignocellulosic feedstock for the production of bio-ethanol. Bioresource Technol 241:434–429. |
| [18] |
Álvarez C, Manuel RF, Bruno D (2016) Enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass from wood. Microb Biotechnol 9: 149–156. doi: 10.1111/1751-7915.12346
|
| [19] | Malinovsky FG, Fangel JU, Willats WGT (2014) The role of the cell wall in plant immunity. Front Plant Sci 5: 178. |
| [20] |
Payne CM, Knott BC, Mayes HB, et al. (2015) Fungal cellulases. Chem Rev 115: 1308–1448. doi: 10.1021/cr500351c
|
| [21] |
Khare SK, Pandey A, Larroche C (2015) Current perspectives in enzymatic saccharification of lignocellulosic biomass. Biochem Eng J 102: 38–44. doi: 10.1016/j.bej.2015.02.033
|
| [22] | Jørgensen H, Kristensen JB, Felby C (2007) Enzymatic conversion of lignocellulose into fermentable sugars: Challenges and opportunities. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 1: 119–134. |
| [23] |
Le GH, Florian F, Jean-Marc D, et al. (2015) Cell wall metabolism in response to abiotic stress. Plants 4: 112–166. doi: 10.3390/plants4010112
|
| [24] |
Pauly M, Keegstra K (2008) Cell-wall carbohydrates and their modification as are source for biofuels. Plant J 54: 559–568. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03463.x
|
| [25] |
Höfte H, Voxeur A (2017) Plant cell walls. Curr Biol 27: R865–R870. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.025
|
| [26] |
Carpita NC, Gibeaut DM (1993) Structural models of primary cell walls in flowering plants: Consistency of molecular structure with the physical properties of the walls during growth. Plant J 3: 1–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.1993.tb00007.x
|
| [27] |
Chundawat SPS, Beckham GT, Himmel ME, et al. (2011) Deconstruction of lignocellulosic biomass to fuels and chemicals. Annu Rev Chem Biomol Eng 2: 121–145. doi: 10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-061010-114205
|
| [28] | Meents MJ, Watanabe Y, Samuels AL (2018) The cell biology of secondary cell wall biosynthesis. Ann Bot. |
| [29] | Turner S, Kumar M (2018) Cellulose synthase complex organization and cellulose microfibril structure. Philos Trans 376: 20170048. |
| [30] |
Himmel ME, Ding SY, Johnson DK, et al. (2007) Biomass recalcitrance: Engineering plants and enzymes for biofuels production. Science 315: 804–807. doi: 10.1126/science.1137016
|
| [31] | Carpita NC, Mccann MC, (2000) The cell wall, In: Buchanan BB, Gruissem W, Jones RL, Biochemistry and molecular biology of plants. Rockville: IL: American Society of Plant Physiologists, 1367. |
| [32] |
Abramson M, Shoseyov O, Shani Z (2010) Plant cell wall reconstruction toward improved lignocellulosic production and processability. Plant Sci 178: 61–72. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.11.003
|
| [33] | Van dWT, Dolstra O, Visser RG, et al. (2017) Stability of cell wall composition and saccharification efficiency in miscanthus across diverse environments. Front Plant Sci 7: 2004. |
| [34] |
Pauly M, Keegstra K (2016) Biosynthesis of the plant cell wall matrix polysaccharide xyloglucan. Annu Rev Plant Biol 67: 235–259. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-043015-112222
|
| [35] | Oliveira DM, Finger-Teixeira A, Mota TR, et al. (2016). Ferulic acid: A key component in grass lignocellulose recalcitrance to hydrolysis. Plant Biotechnol J 13: 1224–1232. |
| [36] |
Kozlova LV, Ageeva MV, Ibragimova NN, et al. (2014) Arrangement of mixed-linkage glucan and glucuronoarabinoxylan in the cell walls of growing maize roots. Ann Bot 114: 1135–1145. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcu125
|
| [37] |
Srivastava PK, Kapoor M (2017) Production, properties, and applications of endo-β-mannanases. Biotechnol Adv 35: 1–19. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2016.11.001
|
| [38] | Biswal AK, Atmodjo MA, Li M, et al. (2018) Sugar release and growth of biofuel crops are improved by downregulation of pectin biosynthesis. Nat Biotechnol. |
| [39] |
Voragen AGJ, Coenen GJ, Verhoef RP, et al. (2009) Pectin, a versatile polysaccharide present in plant cell walls. Struct Chem 20: 263–275. doi: 10.1007/s11224-009-9442-z
|
| [40] |
Mohnen D (2008) Pectin structure and biosynthesis. Curr Opin Plant Biol 11: 266–277. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2008.03.006
|
| [41] | Nguyen TN, Son S, Jordan MC, et al. (2016) Lignin biosynthesis in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): Its response to waterlogging and association with hormonal levels. BMC Plant Biol 16: 1–16. |
| [42] |
Ragauskas AJ, Beckham GT, Biddy MJ, et al. (2014) Lignin valorization: Improving lignin processing in the biorefinery. Science 344: 1246843. doi: 10.1126/science.1246843
|
| [43] | Santos WDD, Ferrarese MDLL (2008) Ferulic acid: An allelochemical troublemaker. Funct Plant Sci Biotechnol 2: 47–55. |
| [44] |
dos Santos WD, Ferrarese ML, Nakamura CV, et al. (2008) Soybean (Glycine max) root lignification induced by ferulic acid the possible mode of action. J Chem Ecol 34: 1230–1241. doi: 10.1007/s10886-008-9522-3
|
| [45] | Liu Q, Luo L, Zheng L (2018) Lignins: Biosynthesis and Biological Functions in Plants. Int J Mol Sci 19: 335. |
| [46] |
Salvador VH, Lima RB, dos Santos WD, et al. (2013) Cinnamic acid increases lignin production and inhibits soybean root growth. PLoS One 8: e69105. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069105
|
| [47] | Oliveira DMD, Finger-Teixeira A, Freitas DLD, et al. (2017) Phenolic Compounds in Plants: Implications for Bioenergy, In: Buckeridge MS, de Souza AP, Advances of Basic Science for Second Generation Bioethanol from Sugarcane, Springer Int Publishing, 39–52. |
| [48] | Boerjan W, Ralph J, Baucher M (2003) Lignin biosynthesis. Annu Rev Plant Biol 166: 63–71. |
| [49] |
Moreira-Vilar FC, Siqueira-Soares RC, Finger-Teixeira A, et al. (2014) The acetyl bromide method is faster, simpler and presents best recovery of lignin in different herbaceous tissues than klason and thioglycolic acid methods. PLoS One 9: e110000. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110000
|
| [50] | Santos WDD, Marchiosi R, Vilar FCW, et al. (2014) Polyvalent Lignin: Recent Approaches in Determination and Applications, In: Lu F, Lignin: Structural analysis, applications in biomaterials and ecological significance, New York: Nova Publishers, 1–26. |
| [51] | Fornalé S, Rencoret J, Garcíacalvo L, et al. (2017) Changes in cell wall polymers and degradability in maize mutants lacking 3′- and 5′-O-methyltransferases involved in lignin biosynthesis. Plant Cell Physiol 58: 240–255. |
| [52] |
Lima RB, Salvador VH, dos Santos WD, et al. (2013) Enhanced lignin monomer production caused by cinnamic acid and its hydroxylated derivatives inhibits soybean root growth. PLoS One 8: e80542. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0080542
|
| [53] |
Saritha M, Arora A, Lata (2012) Biological Pretreatment of Lignocellulosic Substrates for Enhanced Delignification and Enzymatic Digestibility. Indian J Microbiol 52: 122–130. doi: 10.1007/s12088-011-0199-x
|
| [54] |
Henrissat B, Bairoch A (1993) New families in the classification of glycosyl hydrolases based on amino acid sequence similarities. Biochem J 293: 781–788. doi: 10.1042/bj2930781
|
| [55] |
Lombard V, Ramulu HG, Drula E, et al. (2014) The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy). Nucleic Acids Res 42: D490–D495. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1178
|
| [56] |
Bourne Y, Henrissat B (2001) Glycoside hydrolases and glycosyltransferases families and functional modules. Curr Opin Struc Biol 11: 593–600. doi: 10.1016/S0959-440X(00)00253-0
|
| [57] |
Hashimoto H (2006) Recent structural studies of carbohydrate-binding modules. Cell Mol Life Sci 63: 2954–2967. doi: 10.1007/s00018-006-6195-3
|
| [58] |
Boraston AB, Bolam DN, Gilbert HJ, et al. (2004) Carbohydrate-binding modules: Fine-tuning polysaccharide recognition. Biochem J 382: 769–781. doi: 10.1042/BJ20040892
|
| [59] |
Davies G, Henrissat B (1995) Structures and mechanisms of glycosyl hydrolases. Structure 3: 853–859. doi: 10.1016/S0969-2126(01)00220-9
|
| [60] | Terrapon N, Lombard V, Drula E, et al. (2017) The CAZy Database/the Carbohydrate-Active Enzyme (CAZy) Database: Principles and Usage Guidelines, In: Aoki-Kinoshita K (eds), A Practical Guide to Using Glycomics Databases. Springer, Tokyo, 117–131. |
| [61] | Segato F, Dias B, Berto GL, et al. (2017) Cloning, heterologous expression and biochemical characterization of a non-specific endoglucanase family 12 from Aspergillus terreus NIH2624. BBA 1865: 395–403. |
| [62] |
Segato F, Damásio AR, de Lucas RC, et al. (2014) Genomics review of holocellulose deconstruction by aspergilli. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 78: 588–613. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.00019-14
|
| [63] | Olsen JP, Alasepp K, Kari J, et al. (2016) Mechanism of product inhibition for cellobiohydrolase Cel7A during hydrolysis of insoluble cellulose. Biotechnol Bioeng 113: 1178–1186. |
| [64] |
Grange DC, Haan R, Zyl WH (2010) Engineering cellulolytic ability into bioprocessing organisms. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87: 1195–1208. doi: 10.1007/s00253-010-2660-x
|
| [65] |
Damásio ARL, Rubio MV, Gonçalves TA, et al. (2017) Xyloglucan breakdown by endo-xyloglucanase family 74 from Aspergillus fumigatus. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 101: 2893–2903. doi: 10.1007/s00253-016-8014-6
|
| [66] |
Dodd D, Cann IKO (2009) Enzymatic deconstruction of xylan for biofuel production. GCB Bioenergy 1: 2–17. doi: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2009.01004.x
|
| [67] |
Damásio ARDL, Pessedela BC, Segato F, et al. (2012) Improvement of fungal arabinofuranosidase thermal stability by reversible immobilization. Process Biochem 47: 2411–2417. doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2012.09.024
|
| [68] |
Wilkens C, Andersen S, Dumon C, et al. (2017) GH62 arabinofuranosidases: Structure, function and applications. Biotechnol Adv 35: 792–804. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.06.005
|
| [69] |
Wu L, Jiang J, Kallemeijn W, et al. (2017) Activity-based probes for functional interrogation of retaining β-glucuronidases. Nat Chem Biol 13: 867–873 doi: 10.1038/nchembio.2395
|
| [70] |
Bornscheuer UT (2002) Microbial carboxyl esterases: Classification, properties and application in biocatalysis. FEMS Microbiol Rev 26: 73–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2002.tb00599.x
|
| [71] | Krastanova I, Guarnaccia C, Zahariev S, et al. (2005) Heterologous expression, purification, crystallization, X-ray analysis and phasing of the acetyl xylan esterase from Bacillus pumilus. BBA 1748: 222–230. |
| [72] |
Wong DWS (2006) Feruloyl esterase, a key enzyme in biomass degradation. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 133: 87–111. doi: 10.1385/ABAB:133:2:87
|
| [73] |
Dilokpimol A, Mäkelä MR, Aguilarpontes MV, et al. (2016) Diversity of fungal feruloyl esterases: Updated phylogenetic classification, properties, and industrial applications. Biotechnol Biofuels 9: 231. doi: 10.1186/s13068-016-0651-6
|
| [74] |
Faulds CB, Mandalari G, Curto RBL, et al. (2006) Synergy between xylanases from glycoside hydrolase family 10 and 11 and a feruloyl esterase in the release of phenolic acids from cereal arabinoxylan. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 71: 622–629. doi: 10.1007/s00253-005-0184-6
|
| [75] | Wong DWS, Chan VJ, Liao H, et al. (2013) Cloning of a novel feruloyl esterase gene from rumen microbial metagenome and enzyme characterization in synergism with endoxylanases. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 40: 287–295. |
| [76] |
Pérezrodríguez N, Moreira CD, Torrado AA, et al. (2016) Feruloyl esterase production by Aspergillus terreus CECT 2808 and subsequent application to enzymatic hydrolysis. Enzyme Microb Tech 91: 52–58. doi: 10.1016/j.enzmictec.2016.05.011
|
| [77] |
Oliveira DM, Salvador VH, Mota TR, et al. (2016) Feruloyl esterase from Aspergillus clavatus improves xylan hydrolysis of sugarcane bagasse. AIMS Bioeng 4: 1–11. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2017.1.1
|
| [78] | Garg G, Singh A, Kaur A, et al. (2016) Microbial pectinases: An ecofriendly tool of nature for industries. Biotech 6: 47. |
| [79] | Kant S, Vohra A, Gupta R (2013) Purification and physicochemical properties of polygalacturonase from Aspergillus niger MTCC 3323. Protein Expres Purif 87: 11–16. |
| [80] |
Chen Q, Jin Y, Zhang G, et al. (2012) Improving production of bioethanol from duckweed (Landoltia punctata) by pectinase pretreatment. Energies 5: 3019–3032. doi: 10.3390/en5083019
|
| [81] |
Kataria R, Ghosh S (2011) Saccharification of Kans grass using enzyme mixture from Trichoderma reesei for bioethanol production. Bioresource Technol 102: 9970–9975. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2011.08.023
|
| [82] | Oberoi HS, Vadlani PV, Nanjundaswamy A, et al. (2011) Enhanced ethanol production from Kinnow mandarin (Citrus reticulata) waste via a statistically optimized simultaneous saccharification and fermentation process. Bioresource Technol 102: 1593–1601. |
| [83] | Shanmugam VK, Gopalakrishnan D (2016) Screening and partial purification for the production of ligninase enzyme from the fungal isolate Trichosporon asahii. Braz Arch Biol Technol 59: e160220. |
| [84] |
Vrsanska M, Voberkova S, Langer V, et al. (2016) Induction of laccase, lignin peroxidase and manganese peroxidase activities in white-rot fungi using copper complexes. Molecules 21: E1553. doi: 10.3390/molecules21111553
|
| [85] | Pan L, Zhao H, Yu Q (2017) miR397/Laccase gene mediated network improves tolerance to fenoxaprop-P-ethyl in Beckmannia syzigachne and Oryza sativa. Front Plant Sci 23: 879. |
| [86] |
Kameshwar AKS, Qin W (2016) Recent developments in using advanced sequencing technologies for the genomic studies of lignin and cellulose degrading microorganisms. Int J Biol Sci 12: 156–171. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.13537
|
| [87] |
Rastogi M, Shrivastava S (2017) Recent advances in second generation bioethanol production: An insight to pretreatment, saccharification and fermentation processes. Renew Sust Energ Rev 80: 330–340. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.225
|
| [88] |
Huang R, Su R, Qi W, et al. (2011) Bioconversion of lignocellulose into bioethanol process intensification and mechanism research. BioEnerg Res 4: 225–245. doi: 10.1007/s12155-011-9125-7
|
| [89] |
Lygin AV, Upton J, Dohleman FG, et al. (2011) Composition of cell wall phenolics and polysaccharides of the potential bioenergy crop-Miscanthus. Global Change Biol Bioenergy 3: 333–345. doi: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01091.x
|
| [90] |
Wei Y, Li X, Yu L, et al. (2015) Mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of cattle manure and corn stover with biological and chemical pretreatment. Bioresource Technol 198: 431–436. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.035
|
| [91] |
Balat M, Balat H (2009) Recent trends in global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel. Appl Energ 86: 2273–2282. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.03.015
|
| [92] | Cianchetta S, Maggio BD, Burzi PL, et al. (2014) Evaluation of selected white-rot fungal isolates for improving the sugar yield from wheat straw. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 173: 609–623. |
| [93] |
Behera S, Arora R, Nandhagopal N, et al. (2014) Importance of chemical pretreatment for bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass. Renew Sust Energ Rev 36: 91–106. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.047
|
| [94] |
Safari A, Karimi K, Shafiei M (2017) Dilute alkali pretreatment of softwood pine: A biorefinery approach. Bioresource Technol 234: 67–76. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.030
|
| [95] |
Rabemanolontsoa H, Saka S (2016) Various pretreatments of lignocellulosics. Bioresource Technol 199: 83–91. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.029
|
| [96] | Zhu Z, Simister R, Bird S, et al. (2015) Microwave assisted acid and alkali pretreatment of Miscanthus biomass for biorefineries. AIMS Bioeng 2: 446–468. |
| [97] |
Tang C, Shan J, Chen Y, et al. (2017) Organic amine catalytic organosolv pretreatment of corn stover for enzymatic saccharification and high-quality lignin. Bioresource Technol 232: 222–228. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.02.041
|
| [98] |
Silva ASD, Inoue H, Endo T, et al. (2010) Milling pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse and straw for enzymatic hydrolysis and ethanol fermentation. Bioresource Technol 101: 7402–7409. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.05.008
|
| [99] |
Chemat S, Lagha A, AitAmar H, et al. (2004) Comparison of conventional and ultrasound-assisted extraction of carvone and limonene from caraway seeds. Flavour Frag J 19: 188–195. doi: 10.1002/ffj.1339
|
| [100] | Sipponen MH, Rahikainen J, Leskinen T, et al. (2017) Structural changes of lignin in biorefinery pretreatments. Nord Pulp Pap Res J 32: 547–568. |
| [101] |
Fang H, Zhao C, Song XY, et al. (2013) Enhanced cellulolytic enzyme production by the synergism between Trichoderma reesei RUT-30 and Aspergillus niger NL02 and by the addition of surfactants. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 18: 390–398. doi: 10.1007/s12257-012-0562-8
|
| 1. | Dyoni M. Oliveira, Thatiane R. Mota, Adriana Grandis, Gutierrez R. de Morais, Rosymar C. de Lucas, Maria L.T.M. Polizeli, Rogério Marchiosi, Marcos S. Buckeridge, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Lignin plays a key role in determining biomass recalcitrance in forage grasses, 2020, 147, 09601481, 2206, 10.1016/j.renene.2019.10.020 | |
| 2. | Dyoni M. Oliveira, Thatiane R. Mota, Bianca Oliva, Fernando Segato, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Craig B. Faulds, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Feruloyl esterases: Biocatalysts to overcome biomass recalcitrance and for the production of bioactive compounds, 2019, 278, 09608524, 408, 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.01.064 | |
| 3. | Varsha Bohra, Nishant A. Dafale, Hemant J. Purohit, Understanding the alteration in rumen microbiome and CAZymes profile with diet and host through comparative metagenomic approach, 2019, 201, 0302-8933, 1385, 10.1007/s00203-019-01706-z | |
| 4. | Danielly C. I. Martarello, Aline M. Almeida, Renata C. Sinzker, Dyoni M. Oliveira, Rogério Marchiosi, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, The known unknowns in lignin biosynthesis and its engineering to improve lignocellulosic saccharification efficiency, 2021, 2190-6815, 10.1007/s13399-021-01291-6 | |
| 5. | Thatiane R. Mota, Dyoni M. Oliveira, Gutierrez R. Morais, Rogério Marchiosi, Marcos S. Buckeridge, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Hydrogen peroxide-acetic acid pretreatment increases the saccharification and enzyme adsorption on lignocellulose, 2019, 140, 09266690, 111657, 10.1016/j.indcrop.2019.111657 | |
| 6. | Aya Zoghlami, Gabriel Paës, Lignocellulosic Biomass: Understanding Recalcitrance and Predicting Hydrolysis, 2019, 7, 2296-2646, 10.3389/fchem.2019.00874 | |
| 7. | Stefania Bertella, Jeremy S. Luterbacher, Lignin Functionalization for the Production of Novel Materials, 2020, 2, 25895974, 440, 10.1016/j.trechm.2020.03.001 | |
| 8. | Aparna B. Gunjal, Neha N. Patil, Sonali S. Shinde, 2020, Chapter 5, 978-3-030-44670-3, 71, 10.1007/978-3-030-44671-0_5 | |
| 9. | Thatiane R. Mota, Dyoni M. Oliveira, Rachael Simister, Caragh Whitehead, Alexandra Lanot, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Camila A. Rezende, Simon J. McQueen-Mason, Leonardo D. Gomez, Design of experiments driven optimization of alkaline pretreatment and saccharification for sugarcane bagasse, 2021, 321, 09608524, 124499, 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124499 | |
| 10. | Ntsoaki Leticia Mosina, Wolf-Dieter Schubert, Don A. Cowan, Characterization and homology modelling of a novel multi-modular and multi-functional Paenibacillus mucilaginosus glycoside hydrolase, 2019, 23, 1431-0651, 681, 10.1007/s00792-019-01121-8 | |
| 11. | Bethanie Viele, Rebecca Ellingston, Dan Wang, Yerim Park, Riley Higgins, Heather D. Coleman, 2020, Chapter 39, 978-3-030-68619-2, 383, 10.1007/124_2020_39 | |
| 12. | Dyoni M. Oliveira, Érica P. Hoshino, Thatiane R. Mota, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Modulation of cellulase activity by lignin-related compounds, 2020, 10, 2589014X, 100390, 10.1016/j.biteb.2020.100390 | |
| 13. | Dyoni M. Oliveira, Thatiane R. Mota, Fábio V. Salatta, Guilherme H.G. de Almeida, Vanessa G.A. Olher, Marco A.S. Oliveira, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley D. dos Santos, Feruloyl esterase activity and its role in regulating the feruloylation of maize cell walls, 2020, 156, 09819428, 49, 10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.08.046 | |
| 14. | Ryo Kozaki, Hideo Miyake, Enzymatic and molecular characterization of an endoglucanase E from Clostridium cellulovorans 743B, 2019, 128, 13891723, 398, 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2019.03.013 | |
| 15. | Narendra Kumar, Ambesh Dixit, 2021, 9780128243527, 97, 10.1016/B978-0-12-824352-7.00004-9 | |
| 16. | Ryan Lenz, Katherine Louie, Kelsey Sondreli, Stephanie Galanie, Jin-Gui Chen, Wellington Muchero, Benjamin Bowen, Trent Northen, Jared Leboldus, Metabolic patterns in Septoria canker resistant and susceptible Populus trichocarpa genotypes 24 hours post-inoculation, 2021, 0031-949X, 10.1094/PHYTO-02-21-0053-R | |
| 17. | Yufang Qiao, Shuqian Qiao, Xue Yu, Qiuhong Min, Chaojie Pi, Jianbei Qiu, Hongqing Ma, Jianhong Yi, Qiuqiang Zhan, Xuhui Xu, Plant tissue imaging with bipyramidal upconversion nanocrystals by introducing Tm3+ ions as energy trapping centers, 2021, 2040-3364, 10.1039/D0NR07399G | |
| 18. | Douglas Christian Borges Lopes, Cláudia Batista Carraro, Roberto Nascimento Silva, Renato Graciano de Paula, Molecular Characterization of Xyloglucanase cel74a from Trichoderma reesei, 2021, 22, 1422-0067, 4545, 10.3390/ijms22094545 | |
| 19. | Zhi-Hua Liu, 2021, Chapter 1, 978-3-030-65583-9, 1, 10.1007/978-3-030-65584-6_1 | |
| 20. | Anuj Kumar Chandel, Jesús J. Ascencio, Akhilesh K. Singh, Ruly T. Hilares, Lucas Ramos, Rishi Gupta, Yeruva Thirupathaiah, Sridevi Jagavati, 2022, 9781119735953, 1, 10.1002/9781119735984.ch1 | |
| 21. | Sumit Sharma, Shikha Singh, Saurabh Jyoti Sarma, Isolation of a new strain of Aspergillus and molecular structure elucidation of unknown metabolite produced from castor oil, 2023, 120, 1226086X, 316, 10.1016/j.jiec.2022.12.038 | |
| 22. | Maria Guadalupe Villa-Rivera, Horacio Cano-Camacho, Everardo López-Romero, María Guadalupe Zavala-Páramo, The Role of Arabinogalactan Type II Degradation in Plant-Microbe Interactions, 2021, 12, 1664-302X, 10.3389/fmicb.2021.730543 | |
| 23. | Mario Motto, Sanjay Sahay, 2022, 9780128228104, 73, 10.1016/B978-0-12-822810-4.00004-X | |
| 24. | Agnieszka Łubek-Nguyen, Wojciech Ziemichód, Marta Olech, Application of Enzyme-Assisted Extraction for the Recovery of Natural Bioactive Compounds for Nutraceutical and Pharmaceutical Applications, 2022, 12, 2076-3417, 3232, 10.3390/app12073232 | |
| 25. | Atul Srivastava, Tanmay Rohit, Meenakshi Singh, Yaseera Bhombal, Sanjeet Mehariya, Obulisamy Parthiba Karthikeyan, K. Chandrasekhar, Murthy Chavali, 2022, Chapter 1, 978-981-19-4315-7, 1, 10.1007/978-981-19-4316-4_1 | |
| 26. | Anna Siemińska-Kuczer, Monika Szymańska-Chargot, Artur Zdunek, Recent advances in interactions between polyphenols and plant cell wall polysaccharides as studied using an adsorption technique, 2022, 373, 03088146, 131487, 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.131487 | |
| 27. | Delia A. Narváez-Barragán, Omar E. Tovar-Herrera, Arturo Guevara-García, Mario Serrano, Claudia Martinez-Anaya, Mechanisms of plant cell wall surveillance in response to pathogens, cell wall-derived ligands and the effect of expansins to infection resistance or susceptibility, 2022, 13, 1664-462X, 10.3389/fpls.2022.969343 | |
| 28. | Zhila Honarmandrad, Karolina Kucharska, Jacek Gębicki, Processing of Biomass Prior to Hydrogen Fermentation and Post-Fermentative Broth Management, 2022, 27, 1420-3049, 7658, 10.3390/molecules27217658 | |
| 29. | Hasna Nait M’Barek, Soukaina Arif, Hassan Hajjaj, Deciphering biomarkers of the plant cell-wall recalcitrance: towards enhanced delignification and saccharification, 2022, 2190-6815, 10.1007/s13399-022-03594-8 | |
| 30. | Matheus Cordazzo Dias, Uasmim Lira Zidanes, Caio Cesar Nemer Martins, Ana Lázara Matos de Oliveira, Renato Augusto Pereira Damásio, Jaime Vilela de Resende, Eduardo Valério de Barros Vilas Boas, Mohamed Naceur Belgacem, Gustavo Henrique Denzin Tonoli, Saulo Rocha Ferreira, Influence of hemicellulose content and cellulose crystal change on cellulose nanofibers properties, 2022, 213, 01418130, 780, 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.06.012 | |
| 31. | Xiaofeng Wu, Chijioke O. Elekwachi, Shiping Bai, Yuheng Luo, Keying Zhang, Robert J. Forster, Characterizing the Alteration in Rumen Microbiome and Carbohydrate-Active Enzymes Profile with Forage of Muskoxen Rumen through Comparative Metatranscriptomics, 2021, 10, 2076-2607, 71, 10.3390/microorganisms10010071 | |
| 32. | Deovrat Begde, 2022, Chapter 9, 978-981-19-3581-7, 271, 10.1007/978-981-19-3582-4_9 | |
| 33. | Sharmili Roy, Pritam Kumar Dikshit, Knawang Chhunji Sherpa, Anshu Singh, Samuel Jacob, Rajiv Chandra Rajak, Recent nanobiotechnological advancements in lignocellulosic biomass valorization: A review, 2021, 297, 03014797, 113422, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113422 | |
| 34. | Danielly Caroline Inacio Martarello, Débora Carvalho Tonete-Diniz, Diego Eduardo Romero Gonzaga, Aline Marengoni Almeida, Renato Polimeni Constantin, Karla Gabriela da Silva, Rodrigo Polimeni Constantin, Rogério Marchiosi, Vanessa Guimarães Alves-Olher, Fabiano Aparecido Rios, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley Dantas dos Santos, Treating maize plants with benzohydrazide increases saccharification of lignocellulose: A non-transgenic approach to improve cellulosic ethanol production, 2021, 2190-6815, 10.1007/s13399-021-01842-x | |
| 35. | G. D. Ametefe, A. O. Lemo, F. A. Orji, A. K. Lawal, E. E. J. Iweala, S. N. Chinedu, Pectinase Activities of Selected Fungi Grown on Agrowastes via Solid-state Fermentation, 2022, 1054, 1755-1307, 012003, 10.1088/1755-1315/1054/1/012003 | |
| 36. | Zulfiqar Ali, Jiliang Ma, Min Hong, Runcang Sun, Review: applications of the functional photocatalysts BiOX (X = Cl, Br, I) for clean energy, the environment, and future photobiorefineries, 2023, 11, 2050-7488, 3297, 10.1039/D2TA09877F | |
| 37. | Xuwei Liu, C.M.G.C. Renard, A. Rolland-Sabaté, Jiayi Li, S. Perez, C. Le Bourvellec, How do the water-soluble cell wall polysaccharides contribute to formation of complexes with condensed tannins during processing?, 2022, 0567-7572, 45, 10.17660/ActaHortic.2022.1353.6 | |
| 38. | Dyoni M. Oliveira, Thatiane R. Mota, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley D. dos Santos, 2022, 9780128235317, 367, 10.1016/B978-0-12-823531-7.00008-1 | |
| 39. | Sibo Wang, Hongping Liang, Hongli Wang, Linzhou Li, Yan Xu, Yang Liu, Min Liu, Jinpu Wei, Tao Ma, Cheng Le, Jinlong Yang, Chengzhong He, Jie Liu, Jianming Zhao, Yuxian Zhao, Michael Lisby, Sunil Kumar Sahu, Huan Liu, The chromosome‐scale genomes of Dipterocarpus turbinatus and Hopea hainanensis (Dipterocarpaceae) provide insights into fragrant oleoresin biosynthesis and hardwood formation , 2022, 20, 1467-7644, 538, 10.1111/pbi.13735 | |
| 40. | Thomas Klaus, Sabrina Ninck, Andreas Albersmeier, Tobias Busche, Daniel Wibberg, Jianbing Jiang, Alexander G. Elcheninov, Kseniya S. Zayulina, Farnusch Kaschani, Christopher Bräsen, Herman S. Overkleeft, Jörn Kalinowski, Ilya V. Kublanov, Markus Kaiser, Bettina Siebers, Activity-Based Protein Profiling for the Identification of Novel Carbohydrate-Active Enzymes Involved in Xylan Degradation in the Hyperthermophilic Euryarchaeon Thermococcus sp. Strain 2319x1E, 2022, 12, 1664-302X, 10.3389/fmicb.2021.734039 | |
| 41. | Carolina Reis Guimarães, Ayla Sant’Ana da Silva, Daniel Oluwagbotemi Fasheun, Denise M.G. Freire, Elba P.S. Bon, Erika Cristina G. Aguieiras, Jaqueline Greco Duarte, Marcella Fernandes de Souza, Mariana de Oliveira Faber, Marina Cristina Tomasini, Roberta Pereira Espinheira, Ronaldo Rodrigues de Sousa, Ricardo Sposina Sobral Teixeira, Viridiana S. Ferreira-Leitão, 2023, 9780443190599, 551, 10.1016/B978-0-443-19059-9.00004-9 | |
| 42. | Владимир Владимирович Кондратенко, Татьяна Юрьевна Кондратенко, Методологический подход к определению последовательности ферментов для фрагментации полигликанового комплекса растительной ткани, 2022, 2658-767X, 10.36107/spfp.2022.366 | |
| 43. | Brenda Julian Chávez, Stephanie Solano Ornelas, Quintín Rascón Cruz, Carmen Daniela González Barriga, Sigifredo Arévalo Gallegos, Blanca Flor Iglesias Figueroa, Luis Ignacio Siañez Estrada, Tania Siqueiros Cendón, Sugey Ramona Sinagawa García, Edward Alexander Espinoza Sánchez, 2023, 0, 2631-8261, 10.5772/intechopen.111829 | |
| 44. | Martha Monzerrath Orozco-Sifuentes, Rocío Guadalupe Castillo-Godina, Lizeth Guadalupe Campos-Muzquiz, Lissethe Palomo-Ligas, Sendar Daniel Nery-Flores, Jesús David García-Ortiz, Adriana Carolina Flores-Gallegos, Raúl Rodríguez-Herrera, 2023, 9780323959896, 199, 10.1016/B978-0-323-95989-6.00010-3 | |
| 45. | Maxwel Monção, Petter Paulsen Thoresen, Tobias Wretborn, Heiko Lange, Ulrika Rova, Paul Christakopoulos, Leonidas Matsakas, A novel biorefinery concept based on marginally used halophyte biomass, 2023, 2398-4902, 10.1039/D3SE00458A | |
| 46. | Paul Wolski, Brian W. Blankenship, Athiyya Umar, Mica Cabrera, Blake A. Simmons, Kenneth L. Sale, Ezinne C. Achinivu, Factors that influence the activity of biomass-degrading enzymes in the presence of ionic liquids—a review, 2023, 11, 2296-598X, 10.3389/fenrg.2023.1212719 | |
| 47. | Rong Guo, Wei Zhang, Wei Shen, Guoliang Zhang, Taifeng Xie, Ling Li, Jiacuo Jinmei, Yiduan Liu, Fanyong Kong, Baozhu Guo, Benke Li, Yujiang Sun, Shuqin Liu, Analysis of gut microbiota in chinese donkey in different regions using metagenomic sequencing, 2023, 24, 1471-2164, 10.1186/s12864-023-09575-z | |
| 48. | Jie Wang, Kaisen Zhao, Mianying Li, Huimei Fan, Meigui Wang, Siqi Xia, Yang Chen, Xue Bai, Zheliang Liu, Jiale Ni, Wenqiang Sun, Xianbo Jia, Songjia Lai, A Preliminary Study of the Potential Molecular Mechanisms of Individual Growth and Rumen Development in Calves with Different Feeding Patterns, 2023, 11, 2076-2607, 2423, 10.3390/microorganisms11102423 | |
| 49. | Zu Jia Lee, Cundong Xie, Ken Ng, Hafiz A. R. Suleria, Unraveling the bioactive interplay: seaweed polysaccharide, polyphenol and their gut modulation effect, 2023, 1040-8398, 1, 10.1080/10408398.2023.2274453 | |
| 50. | Filippo Brienza, David Cannella, Diego Montesdeoca, Iwona Cybulska, Damien P. Debecker, A guide to lignin valorization in biorefineries: traditional, recent, and forthcoming approaches to convert raw lignocellulose into valuable materials and chemicals, 2024, 2753-8125, 10.1039/D3SU00140G | |
| 51. | Y Khaldoun, W H Al-Samaraae, A H Abboud, The Effect of (Laccases, Lignin Peroxidases, Manganese Peroxidases Enzymes) on the Chemical Composition of Rough Fodder, 2023, 1252, 1755-1307, 012128, 10.1088/1755-1315/1252/1/012128 | |
| 52. | Vincent Ninkuu, Zhixin Liu, Yaping Zhou, Enzhi Guo, Xiao Song, Peibo Gao, Yajia Xie, Xuwu Sun, Mitigating biomass recalcitrance for plant‐based bioenergy production, 2023, 1, 2751-4102, 122, 10.1002/moda.21 | |
| 53. | Ali H. Bahkali, Asad Syed, Abdallah M. Elgorban, Mohamed A. Abdel-Wahab, Neha Srivastava, Vijai Kumar Gupta, Novel strategy to elevate solid state fermentation to produce alkilophilic endoglucanase using date waste feedstocks and peapod extract based nutrient media and expired probiotic strain: application in fermentable sugar production, 2024, 09575820, 10.1016/j.psep.2024.01.017 | |
| 54. | Tom Kwok Lun Hui, Irene Ching Nam Lo, Karen Ka Wing Wong, Chandler Tsz To Tsang, Ling Ming Tsang, Metagenomic analysis of gut microbiome illuminates the mechanisms and evolution of lignocellulose degradation in mangrove herbivorous crabs, 2024, 24, 1471-2180, 10.1186/s12866-024-03209-4 | |
| 55. | S. Rahul, N. Valliammai, S. Varshiny, M. Lakshaya, S. Prabakaran, S. Sudalai, A. Arumugam, 2024, 9780443136139, 127, 10.1016/B978-0-443-13613-9.00013-1 | |
| 56. | Ramsha Saeed, Dildar Ahmed, Enzyme-mediated ultrasound-assisted extraction of rutin, quercetin, and other antioxidant and antidiabetic compounds from Holarrhena antidysentericaseeds and optimization as per RSM, 2024, 201, 0026265X, 110622, 10.1016/j.microc.2024.110622 | |
| 57. | Lanhao Zhang, Dongmei Yu, Yehong Chen, Chaojun Wu, Effect of Urea/choline chloride treatment on removing hemicellulose during alkali extraction in the preparation of high-purity dissolving pulps, 2024, 222, 09266690, 119709, 10.1016/j.indcrop.2024.119709 | |
| 58. | Vincent Ninkuu, Zhixin Liu, Aizhi Qin, Yajie Xie, Xiao Song, Xuwu Sun, Impact of straw returning on soil ecology and crop yield: A review, 2025, 11, 24058440, e41651, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e41651 | |
| 59. | Oscar Sariñana-Aldaco, Luz Leticia Rivera-Solís, Adalberto Benavides-Mendoza, Armando Robledo-Olivo, Rosa María Rodríguez-Jasso, Susana González-Morales, Using Brown Algae in the Plant–Soil System: A Sustainable Approach to Improving the Yield and Quality of Agricultural Crops, 2025, 11, 2311-7524, 94, 10.3390/horticulturae11010094 | |
| 60. | Kiran Konain, Sajida Farid, Shazia Hameed, Fozia Rehman, Muhammad Samie, Faiza Sharif, Muhammad Zaman, Syed Rashid Habib, Jeevithan Elango, Saeed Ur Rahman, Arabinoxylan-Incorporated Poly(ε-caprolactone) Nanofiber Matrix Promote Fibroblast Cells Adhesion and Proliferation, 2025, 15, 2191-1630, 10.1007/s12668-025-01924-4 | |
| 61. | Biao Zheng, Lianzhong Deng, Hongmei Ma, Jun Wang, Yunhua Yao, Dalong Qi, Yuecheng Shen, Zhenrong Sun, Shian Zhang, Defect-related luminescence in BaF2 nanoparticles for plant cell imaging, 2025, 126, 0003-6951, 10.1063/5.0268612 |
Figures(2) / Tables(1)
Thatiane Rodrigues Mota, Dyoni Matias de Oliveira, Rogério Marchiosi, Osvaldo Ferrarese-Filho, Wanderley Dantas dos Santos. Plant cell wall composition and enzymatic deconstruction[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2018, 5(1): 63-77. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2018.1.63
| Group of enzymes | Enzymes | Linkages breakdown |
| Cellulases | Cellobiohydrolase | β-(1,4)-Glc |
| Endoglucanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| β-Glucosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Hemicellulases | Endoxylanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Xyl |
| β-Xylosidase | β-(1,4)-Xyl | |
| β-Glucanase/lichenase | β(1,3)-Glc, β(1,4)-Glc | |
| Feruloyl esterase | Ester linkage FA-Ara | |
| p-Coumaroyl esterase | Ester linkage pCA-Ara | |
| Arabinofuranosidase | α-(1,2)-Ara, α-(1,3)-Ara | |
| Glucuronidase | α(1,2)-GlcA | |
| 4-O-Glucuronoyl methylesterase | α-(1,2)-4-O-metil-α-glucuronic | |
| Xyloglucanase | Endo-α-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Fucosidase | α-(1,2)-Fuc | |
| α-Galactosidase | α-(1,3)-Gal, α-(1,6)-Gal | |
| Mannanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| β-Mannosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| Acetyl xylan esterase | α-(1,2)-Xyl |
DownLoad: CSV| Group of enzymes | Enzymes | Linkages breakdown |
| Cellulases | Cellobiohydrolase | β-(1,4)-Glc |
| Endoglucanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| β-Glucosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Hemicellulases | Endoxylanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Xyl |
| β-Xylosidase | β-(1,4)-Xyl | |
| β-Glucanase/lichenase | β(1,3)-Glc, β(1,4)-Glc | |
| Feruloyl esterase | Ester linkage FA-Ara | |
| p-Coumaroyl esterase | Ester linkage pCA-Ara | |
| Arabinofuranosidase | α-(1,2)-Ara, α-(1,3)-Ara | |
| Glucuronidase | α(1,2)-GlcA | |
| 4-O-Glucuronoyl methylesterase | α-(1,2)-4-O-metil-α-glucuronic | |
| Xyloglucanase | Endo-α-(1,4)-Glc | |
| Fucosidase | α-(1,2)-Fuc | |
| α-Galactosidase | α-(1,3)-Gal, α-(1,6)-Gal | |
| Mannanase | Endo-β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| β-Mannosidase | β-(1,4)-Glc-Man | |
| Acetyl xylan esterase | α-(1,2)-Xyl |
