Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Aug 1;17(5):fox044.
doi: 10.1093/femsyr/fox044.

Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for second-generation ethanol production: from academic exploration to industrial implementation

Mickel L A Jansen  1 , Jasmine M Bracher  2 , Ioannis Papapetridis  2 , Maarten D Verhoeven  2 , Hans de Bruijn  1 , Paul P de Waal  1 , Antonius J A van Maris  2 , Paul Klaassen  1 , Jack T Pronk  2
Affiliations
Review

Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for second-generation ethanol production: from academic exploration to industrial implementation

Mickel L A Jansen et al. FEMS Yeast Res. .

Abstract

The recent start-up of several full-scale 'second generation' ethanol plants marks a major milestone in the development of Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates of agricultural residues and energy crops. After a discussion of the challenges that these novel industrial contexts impose on yeast strains, this minireview describes key metabolic engineering strategies that have been developed to address these challenges. Additionally, it outlines how proof-of-concept studies, often developed in academic settings, can be used for the development of robust strain platforms that meet the requirements for industrial application. Fermentation performance of current engineered industrial S. cerevisiae strains is no longer a bottleneck in efforts to achieve the projected outputs of the first large-scale second-generation ethanol plants. Academic and industrial yeast research will continue to strengthen the economic value position of second-generation ethanol production by further improving fermentation kinetics, product yield and cellular robustness under process conditions.

Keywords: biofuels; biomass hydrolysates; industrial fermentation; metabolic engineering; pentose fermentation; strain improvement; yeast biotechnology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Schematic process-flow diagram for ethanol production from lignocellulose, based on physically separated processes for pre-treatment, hydrolysis and fermentation, combined with on-site cultivation of filamentous fungi for production of cellulolytic enzymes and on-site propagation of engineered pentose-fermenting yeast strains.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Key strategies for engineering carbon and redox metabolism in S. cerevisiae strains for alcoholic fermentation of lignocellulosic feedstocks. Colors indicate the following pathways and processes: black, native S. cerevisiae enzymes of glycolysis and alcoholic fermentation; magenta, native enzymes of the non-oxidative pentose-phosphate pathway (PPP), overexpressed in pentose-fermenting strains; red, conversion of d-xylose into d-xylulose-5-phosphate by heterologous expression of a xylose isomerase (XI) or combined expression of heterologous xylose reductase (XR) and xylitol dehydrogenase (XDH), together with the overexpression of (native) xylulokinase (Xks1); green, conversion of l-arabinose into d-xylulose-5-phosphate by heterologous expression of a bacterial AraA/AraB/AraD pathway; blue, expression of a heterologous acetylating acetaldehyde dehydrogenase (A-ALD) for reduction of acetic acid to ethanol; gray, native glycerol pathway.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Annual production volumes of cellulosic ethanol in the USA from 2010 until November 2016. Numbers are based on RIN D code 3 RIN (renewable identification number) credits generated (accounted as cellulosic ethanol; United States Environmental Protection Agency 2017).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Problems not encountered in shake flask cultures: non-yeast-related challenges in large-scale processing of lignocellulosic biomass. (A) Small rocks collected from corn stover (picture courtesy of POET-DSM Liberty). (B) Example of severely eroded equipment (picture courtesy of Iogen Corporation; Lane 2016b).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Abbott DA, Knijnenburg TA, De Poorter LMI et al. Generic and specific transcriptional responses to different weak organic acids in anaerobic chemostat cultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Yeast Res 2007;7:819–33. - PubMed
    1. Adeboye PT, Bettiga M, Olsson L. The chemical nature of phenolic compounds determines their toxicity and induces distinct physiological responses in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in lignocellulose hydrolysates. AMB Express 2014;4:46. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adeboye PT, Bettiga M, Olsson L. ALD5, PAD1, ATF1 and ATF2 facilitate the catabolism of coniferyl aldehyde, ferulic acid and p-coumaric acid in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sci Rep 2017;7:42635. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Albers E, Johansson E, Franzén CJ et al. Selective suppression of bacterial contaminants by process conditions during lignocellulose based yeast fermentations. Biotechnol Biofuels 2011;4:59. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alkasrawi M, Rudolf A, Lidén G et al. Influence of strain and cultivation procedure on the performance of simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam pretreated spruce. Enzyme Microb Technol 2006;38:279–86.

MeSH terms