Crop residues: applications of lignocellulosic biomass in the context of a biorefinery

doi:10.1007/s11708-021-0730-7

Frontiers in Energy

2022, Vol. 16

Issue (2): 224-245 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-021-0730-7

本期目录

Crop residues: applications of lignocellulosic biomass in the context of a biorefinery

Maria Carolina ANDRADE, Caio de Oliveira GORGULHO SILVA, Leonora Rios de SOUZA MOREIRA, Edivaldo Ximenes FERREIRA FILHO(

)

Laboratory of Enzymology, Department of Cellular Biology, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil

全文: PDF(1392 KB) HTML

Abstract：

Interest in lignocellulosic biomass conversion technologies has increased recently because of their potential to reduce the dependency on non-renewable feedstocks. Residues from a variety of crops are the major source of lignocellulose, which is being produced in increasingly large quantities worldwide. The commercial exploitation of crop residues as feedstocks for biorefineries which could be used to produce a variety of goods such as biofuels, biochemicals, bioplastics, and enzymes is an attractive approach not only for adding value to residues but also for providing renewable products required by the expanding bioeconomy market. Moreover, the implementation of biorefineries in different regions has the potential to add value to the specific crop residues produced in the region. In this review, several aspects of crop residue application in biorefineries are discussed, including the role of crop residues in the bioeconomy and circular economy concepts, the main technical aspects of crop residue conversion in biorefineries, the main crop residues generated in different regions of the world and their availability, the potential value-added bioproducts that can be extracted or produced from each crop residue, and the major advantages and challenges associated with crop residue utilization in biorefineries. Despite their potential, most biomass refining technologies are not sufficiently advanced or financially viable. Several technical obstacles, especially with regard to crop residue collection, handling, and pre-treatment, prevent the implementation of biorefineries on a commercial scale. Further research is needed to resolve these scale-up-related challenges. Increased governmental incentives and bioeconomic strategies are expected to boost the biorefinery market and the cost competitiveness of biorefinery products.

Key words： crop residue biorefinery bioproduct biomass circular bioeconomy enzyme

收稿日期: 2019-12-02 出版日期: 2022-05-25

Corresponding Author(s): Edivaldo Ximenes FERREIRA FILHO

引用本文:

. [J]. Frontiers in Energy, 2022, 16(2): 224-245.
Maria Carolina ANDRADE, Caio de Oliveira GORGULHO SILVA, Leonora Rios de SOUZA MOREIRA, Edivaldo Ximenes FERREIRA FILHO. Crop residues: applications of lignocellulosic biomass in the context of a biorefinery. Front. Energy, 2022, 16(2): 224-245.

链接本文:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/10.1007/s11708-021-0730-7
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/CN/Y2022/V16/I2/224

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Plantations	Leading producers	Global production/t	Total global wastes/t	Residues	Cellulose/%	Hemicellulose/%	Lignin/%	References
Cotton	China (25%), India (22%), USA (15%), Pakistan (8%), Brazil (5%)	6.54E+ 07	9.81E+ 07	Cotton sheets, cotton stalks	80	*	*	[37–39]
Rice	China (19%), India (18%), Indonesia (8%), Bangladesh (6%), Vietnam (4%)	7.41E+ 08	1.10E+ 07	Rice straw, rice hulls	25.1–38	27–37.1	8–15.2	[16,37,38,40]
Coffee	Brazil (33%), Vietnam (16%), Colombia (8%), Indonesia (7%), Ethiopia (5%)	9.22E+ 06	3.67E+ 06	Coffee husks, coffee pulp, wastewater	37.2	24.9	*	[37,38,41]
Sugarcane	Brazil (41%), India (18%), China (6%), Thailand (5%), Pakistan (3%)	1.89E+ 09	4.73E+ 08	Sugarcane bagasse, cane straw	43 –39	26 – 30	22–25	[16,37,38,40]
Barley	Russia (20%), Germany (11%), France (11%), Australia (11%), Ukraine (10%)	1.41E+ 08	1.78E+ 06	Barley straw	39.6	24.7	17.2	[16,37,38]
Beans	Myanmar (19%), India (14%), Brazil (10%), USA (5%), United Republic of Tanzania (4%)	2.68E+ 07	3.66E+ 05	Peel beans	*	*	*	[37,38]
Orange	Brazil (24%), China (12%), India (10%), USA (7%), Mexico (6%)	7.32E+ 07	4.29E+ 07	Orange peel, orange bagasse	*	*	*	[37,38]
Apple	China (50%), USA (5%), Poland (4%), Turkey (3%), India (3%)	8.93E+ 07	5.85E+ 07	Apple pomace	*	*	*	[37,38,42]
Corn	USA (36%), China (22%), Brazil (6%), Argentina (4%), Mexico (3%)	1.06E+ 09	7.49E+ 08	Corncobs, corn straw	37.3	25.5	13.8 – 16.7	[15,16,37,38,43]
Soybean	USA (35%), Brazil (28%), Argentina (17%), India (4%), China (3%)	3.35E+ 08	2.98E+ 08	Soybean hull	25	11.9	17.6	[16,37,38]
Sorghum	USA (19%), Nigeria (11%), Sudan (10%), Mexico (8%), Ethiopia (7%)	6.39E+ 07	3.54E+ 07	Sorghum straw	36	18	15.5	[16,37,38]
Wheat	China (17%), India (12%), Russia (10%), USA (8%), Canada (3%)	7.69E+ 08	1.13E+ 07	Wheat straw	35–37.3	24–28.7	17.8–25	[16,37,38,40]
Grape	China (19%), Italy (11%), USA (9%), France (8%), Spain (8%)	7.74E+ 07	1.24E+ 07	Grape pomace	*	*	*	[37,38]

Tab.1

Fig.4

Residue	Application	Conversion process	Reference
Coffee silverskin	Production of levulinic acid	Water-soluble phenolics were extracted from CS through hydrothermal pre-treatment in a microwave reactor. Pretreated CS was then subjected to diluted hydrochloric acid treatment in a microwave reactor with varying biomass loadings, acid concentrations and reaction temperature/time to produce levulinic acid	[79]
Coffee silverskin	Production of a-amylase	SSF process using a fungal strain Neurospora crassa CFR 308	[80]
Coffee wastes	Production of biogas	Alkaline and acid pre-treatments of a mixture composed of coffee seed skin, seed refuse and coffee product refuse followed by the inoculum of cow and chicken manure and an anaerobic sludge taken from a domestic water treatment system	[89]
Coffee wastewater	Production of bioethanol	Batch fermentation using Hanseniaspora uvarum UFLA CAF76 as inoculum in ground coffee pulp mixed with coffee wastewater	[90]
Coffee husks	Production of endoglucanase	Steam-exploded coffee husks were used as substrate for cellulase production using Rhizopus stolonifer CFR 307 under SSF. Fermentation parameters (pH, moisture and fermentation time) were optimized through response surface methodology (RSM). Enzymes thus produced were applied in ethanol production from coffee husks and as additive in detergent formulation	[86]
Coffee husks	Production of gibberellic acid	SSF and SmF fermentation of alkali pretreated coffee husks and cassava bagasse (7:3, dry wt) employing Gibberella fujokuroi LPB-06	[91]
Coffee husks	Production of carotenoids	Alkaline-pretreated coffee husks were used as substrate for Rhodotorula mucilaginosa CCMA0156 as carotenoid-producing strain under SmF. Intracellular carotenoids were extracted with different organic solvents	[92]
Coffee husks	Production of carotenoids		[92]
Coffee husks	Production of xylanase and cellulase	Multispecies SSF process applying a specialized consortium of microorganisms (Pseudoxanthomonas taiwanensis, Sphingobacterium composti, Cyberlindnera jardinii and Barnettozyma californica among others)	[81]
Coffee pulp	Cultivation of mushrooms	Six strains of Pleurotus were grown in a mixture of coffee pulp and wheat straw	[93]
Coffee pulp	Production of pectinase	SSF process employing Aspergillus niger AW96 and SmF process employing A. niger AW99	[82]
Spent coffee ground	Production of biodiesel	Oil was extracted from SCG with hexane. Oil transesterification reaction was performed with ethanol or methanol via enzymatic catalysis with three commercial enzymes (Lipozymes RM 1M, TL 100L, and CALBL)	[73]

Tab.2

Residue	Application	Conversion process	Reference
Soybean hulls	Production of protease, b- amylase, a-amylase	SSF process using a fungal strain Penicillium spp. LEMIA 38221 in different conditions (pH, temperature and substrate concentration)	[98]
Soybean hulls	Production of ethanol	Soybean residue was pretreated with dilute H₂SO₄ and subjected to separate hydrolysis and fermentation employing commercial cellulase cocktails (a mixture of C-Tec 2 and Viscozyme L) and S. cerevisiae (wild-type strain or the KCCM 1129 strain adapted to high galactose concentrations)	[94]
Soybean hulls and citric pulp	Production of gibberellic acid	SSF performed with Fusarium moniliforme LPB 03 optimized for physical and chemical conditions (pH, initial humidity and composition of nutritive solution)	[97]
Soybean oil deodorizer distillate	Production of biodiesel	CaO obtained from calcined duck eggshell was used as catalyst for the esterification of SODD with methanol	[19]
Soybean straw	Production of biogas	Solid-state anaerobic digestion (SS-AD) of soybean processing waste (consisting of soybeans, soybean straw and soybean oil extraction residues) and hay with the effluent from a mesophilic liquid anaerobic digester as inoculum	[102]
Okara	Production of b-glucosidase	Fresh and heat-treated okara were subjected to SSF process using Saccharomyces cerevisiae r.f. bayanus	[96]
Okara	Production of probiotic	A probiotic creamy sauce was produced with Lactobacillus acidophilus LA3-fermented okara flour plus soymilk and different types of gelling components	[104]
Okara	Production of citric acid	Solid-state mixed fermentation of okara with Aspergillus terreus (involved in okara saccharification) and Aspergillus niger (responsible for citric acid production)	[105]
Soybean meal	Production of lipase	SSF process applying DCCR design to evaluate spore concentration, cultivation and humidity parameters affecting the enzymatic production by Penicillium sp. S4	[99]
Soybean meal	Production of cellulase	Cellulase production by Chaetomium globosum BCC5776 was performed under SmF conditions in optimized medium containing 1% soybean meal, 1% empty palm fruit bunch and 2% Avicel®. Home-made enzyme system was supplemented with commercial b-glucosidase (Novozyme® 188) and hemicellulases (Accellerase® XY) for the efficient hydrolysis of alkaline-pretreated rice straw	[106]
Soybean meal	Production of cellulase		[106]
Soybean residues	Production of bioethanol	Two residues, i.e. skim (protein-rich fraction) and insoluble fiber (carbohydrate-rich fraction), generated from soybean oil extraction were used as additives in dry-grind corn fermentation for ethanol production. The addition of skim and/or insoluble fiber enhanced ethanol production by decreasing the corn fermentation time, increased corn distillers oil recovery from this tillage and increased the protein content while reducing fiber and oil contents of distillers dried grains	[107]

Tab.3

Residue	Application	Conversion process	Reference
Sugarcane bagasse and citrus residues	Production of glycosyl hydrolases	RSM methodology to select the best enzyme inducing biomass (sugarcane bagasse, soybean bran, wheat bran, apple bagasse or citrus bagasse) using Annulohypoxylon stygium in SmF process	[127]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of xylanases	Pretreated SCB was used as substrate for Aspergillus terreus in SmF	[128]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of xylanase	SmF process employing pretreated SCB and Emericella nidulans	[13]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of endoglucanase	Enzymatically liquefied sugarcane bagasse was used as substrate for endoglucanase production by Aspergillus niger A12. The produced enzymes were then applied to liquefy sugarcane bagasse for later use as substrate for enzyme production in a closed-loop strategy	[12]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of cellulase, b-glucosidase and xylanase	Mathematical model describes enzyme production by Trichoderma harzianum P4P11 through variation of substrate concentration, cell growth and induction of different enzyme classes (cellulases, b-glucosidases and xylanases) using steam-exploded and alkali-pretreated SCB	[116]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of biobutanol	Biorefinery model was created based on Aspen Plus® simulations to produce sugar, ethanol and butanol (25:50:25 configuration) employing strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum or mutant strain Clostridium beijerinckii BA101	[126]
Sugarcane bagasse	Production of levulinic acid	Biorefinery model that fractionates SCB and wheat straw using liquid hot water pre-treatment and enzymatic hydrolysis with commercial cocktail Cellic® CTec2	[119]
Sugarcane straw	Production of bioethanol	Application of the semi-mechanistic model using SS hydrothermal pretreated with and without alkali delignification with 4% NaOH and enzymatic hydrolysis employing Cellic® CTec2	[129]
Sugarcane straw	Production of lignin	Lignin with high degree of purity (>98%) and low sulfur content (<2%) was extracted from sugarcane straw through SO₂-ethanol-water fractionation at different temperatures (135°C–160°C)	[123]
Sugarcane straw	Production of xylitol	The hemicellulosic hydrolysate obtained through dilute acid pre-treatment of sugarcane straw with 1% H₂SO₄ was fermented with Candida guillermondii FT20037 using three nutritional supplementation conditions	[64]

Tab.4

Tab.5

Tab.6

Residue	Application	Conversion process	Reference
Rice straw	Production of cellulase	SmF process employing milled straw treated with 1.25% or 5% NH₄OH using Trichoderma reesei ATCC-66589 and Humicola insolens ATCC-26908 as enzyme producers	[158]
Rice straw	Production of biochar	Straw and rice husks of two different varieties (Koshihikari and IR50404) were exposed to high pyrolysis temperatures (300°C–800°C)	[166]
Rice straw	Production of biobutanol	The enzymatic hydrolysate of non-pretreated rice straw was used as carbon source for ABE fermentation with Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum N1-4 for biobutanol production. High initial cell concentration under non-sterile conditions achieved the similar butanol yields obtained under sterile conditions	[168]
Rice straw	Production of bioelectricity	Impregnation of rice straw with FeCl₃ solution (10% w/v) followed by heat pre-treatment and enzymatic hydrolysis with enzyme pool from Aspergillus niger and Trichoderma reesei. The fuel cell reactor was loaded with the diluted hydrolysate in an anode compartment including dissolved air as the final electron acceptor	[169]
Rice residues (straw and husk)	Production of nanosilica	Rice residues were burned until ash generation and treated with sodium hydroxide. Sodium silicate was precipitated with HCl or H₂SO₄, washed, dried and burned at 575°C to obtain nanosilica powder	[167]
Rice straw	Production of lignin-degrading enzymes	Myrothecium roridum LG7 was employed for the biological pre-treatment (delignification) of a mixture of rice straw and herbaceous weed Parthenium sp. under SSF condition. Partially delignified biomass was more susceptible to saccharification with commercial cellulase enzymes (Accellerase® 1500) than untreated biomass	[162]
Rice husk	Production of lignin, cellulose nanocrystals and silica	Sequential acid leaching (HCl) and alkaline extraction (NaOH) were used to recover high purity lignin from rice husks. The remaining cellulose-rich solids were bleached with chlorine free treatment to yield cellulose nanocrystals. Silica was also recovered from the aqueous supernatant of lignin extraction	[170]

Tab.7

1	M Finkelstein, J. Sheehan Biomass and biotechnology: a key to sustainability. Bioenergy: Knowledge Discovery Framework, 2009
2	Energy EE& R. Bionergy basics. 2018–3-2, available at the website of Department of Energy
3	C O G Silva, R P Vaz, E X F Filho. Bringing plant cell wall-degrading enzymes into the lignocellulosic biorefinery concept. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 2018, 12: 277–289
4	European Comission. A sustainable bioeconomy for Europe: strengthening the connection between economy, society and the environment. 2018
5	M M Bugge, T Hansen, A Klitkou. What is the bioeconomy? A review of the literature. Sustainability, 2016, 8: 22 https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070691
6	BW Bioeconomy. What is a bioeconomy? 2019–11–18, available at the website of biooekonomie-bw
7	H Bos, B R Annevelink, O van Ree. The role of biomass, bioenergy and biorefining in a circular economy. IEA Bioenergy, 2017
8	A Tozlu, E Özahi, A Abuşoʇlu. Waste to energy technologies for municipal solid waste management in Gaziantep. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016, 54: 809–815
9	A S Nizami, M Rehan, M Waqas, et al. Waste biorefineries: enabling circular economies in developing countries. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 241: 1101–1117 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.097
10	S Venkata Mohan, G N Nikhil, P Chiranjeevi, et al. Waste biorefinery models towards sustainable circular bioeconomy: critical review and future perspectives. Bioresource Technology, 2016, 215: 2–12 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.03.130
11	Y Yang, P Zhang, X Yang, et al. Spatial and temporal dynamics of agricultural residue resources in the last 30 years in China. Waste Management & Research, 2016, 34(12): 1231–1240 https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X16670001
12	P Squinca, A C Badino, C S Farinas. A closed-loop strategy for endoglucanase production using sugarcane bagasse liquefied by a home-made enzymatic cocktail. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 249: 976–982 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.10.107
13	C O G Silva, E N Aquino, C A O Ricart, et al. GH11 xylanase from Emericella nidulans with low sensitivity to inhibition by ethanol and lignocellulose-derived phenolic compounds. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 2015, 362(13): 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnv094
14	O Rosales-Calderon, V Arantes. A review on commercial-scale high-value products that can be produced alongside cellulosic ethanol. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2019, 12(1):240 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-019-1529-1
15	H A R Gomes, A J Silva, D P, Gómez-Mendoza et al. Identification of multienzymatic complexes in the Clonostachys byssicola secretomes produced in response to different lignocellulosic carbon sources. Journal of Biotechnology, 2017, 254: 51–58 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2017.06.001
16	A Thorenz, L Wietschel, D Stindt, et al. Assessment of agroforestry residue potentials for the bioeconomy in the European Union. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 176: 348–359 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.143
17	C O G Silva, E X F Filho. A review of holocellulase production using pretreated lignocellulosic substrates. BioEnergy Resource, 2017, 10: 592–602 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-017-9815-x
18	A de M, Lopes E X Ferreira Filho L R. , de Souza Moreira An update on enzymatic cocktails for lignocellulose breakdown. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2018, 125(3):632–645 https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.13923
19	X Yin, X Duan, Q You, et al. Biodiesel production from soybean oil deodorizer distillate using calcined duck eggshell as catalyst. Energy Conversion and Management, 2016, 112: 199–207 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.01.026
20	S D King. The future of industrial biorefineries. World Economic Forum, 2010
21	D M Lapola, R Schaldach, J Alcamo, et al. Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010, 107(8): 3388–3393 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907318107
22	U Fillat, R Martín-Sampedro, D Macaya-Sanz, et al. Potential of lignin-degrading endophytic fungi on lignocellulosic biorefineries. In: Maheshwari D K, Annapurna K, eds. Endophytes: Crop Productivity and Protection. Springer, Cham, 2017, 95–110 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66544-3_12
23	L Bech, F Herbst, M N Grell, et al. On-site enzyme production by trichoderma asperellum for the degradation of duckweed. Fungal Genomics & Biology, 2015, 5(02): 10 https://doi.org/10.4172/2165-8056.1000126
24	J Andreaus, E Ximenes Ferreira Filho, E Pinto da Silva Bon. Biotechnology of holocellulose-degrading enzymes. In: Hou C T, Shaw J F, eds. Biocatalysis and Bioenergy. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2008, 195–229 https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470385869.ch11
25	M Hoogwijk, A Faaij, R van den Broek, et al. Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2003, 25(2): 119–133 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00191-5
26	S S Andrew. Crop residue removal for biomass energy production: effects on soils and recommendations. USDA-Natural Resource Conservation Service, 2006
27	V Daioglou, E Stehfest, B Wicke, et al. Projections of the availability and cost of residues from agriculture and forestry. GCB Bioenergy, 2016, 8(2): 456–470 https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12285
28	N Scarlat, M Martinov, J F Dallemand. Assessment of the availability of agricultural crop residues in the European Union: potential and limitations for bioenergy use. Waste Management (New York, N.Y.), 2010, 30(10): 1889–1897 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.04.016
29	BCC Publishing. Global markets for enzymes in industrial applications. 2018–7-13, at the website of bccresearch
30	S Searle, C Malins. A reassessment of global bioenergy potential in 2050. GCB Bioenergy, 2015, 7(2): 328–336 https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12141
31	S Zalfar. A primer on agricultural residues. 2019–11–17, available at the website of bioenergyconsult
32	N Tripathi, C D Hills, R S Singh, et al. Biomass waste utilisation in low-carbon products: harnessing a major potential resource. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 2019, 2(1): 1–10 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-019-0093-5
33	M R Cherubin, D M D S Oliveira, B J Feigl, et al. Crop residue harvest for bioenergy production and its implications on soil functioning and plant growth: a review. Scientia Agrícola, 2018, 75(3): 255–272 https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-992x-2016-0459
34	B D D Tarkalson, B Brown, H Kok, et al. Impact of removing straw from wheat and barley fields: a literature review. Better Crops with Plant Food, 2009, 93: 17–19
35	M Monteleone, A R B Cammerino, P Garofalo, et al. Straw-to-soil or straw-to-energy? An optimal trade off in a long term sustainability perspective. Applied Energy, 2015, 154: 891–899 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.04.108
36	D Sietske Boschma, I Kees, W Kwant. Rice straw and wheat straw: potentials feedstocks for the biobased economy. NL Agency Ministry of Economic Affairs, 2013
37	FAO. FAOSTAT. 2018–3-18, available at the website of FAO
38	FAO Crop Residues. Emissions database agriculture. 2017–6-28, available at the website of FAO
39	V B Agbor, N Cicek, R Sparling, et al. Biomass pretreatment: fundamentals toward application. Biotechnology Advances, 2011, 29(6): 675–685 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.05.005
40	R de M Nunes, E A Guarda, J C V Serra, et al. Agro-industrial waste: production potential of second generation ethanol in Brazil. Revista Liberato, 2013, 14: 113–238 (in Portuguese)
41	USDA Foreign Agricultural Service. Production, supply and distribution. 2018–3-18, available at the website of USDA
42	R Shalini, D K Gupta. Utilization of pomace from apple processing industries: a review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2010, 47(4): 365–371 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0061-x
43	R Lal. World crop residues production and implications of its use as a biofuel. Environment International, 2005, 31(4): 575–584 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2004.09.005
44	D K Ray, N D Mueller, P C West, et al. Yield trends are insufficient to double global crop production by 2050. PLoS One, 2013, 8(6): e66428 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066428
45	S Kim, B E Dale. Global potential bioethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2004, 26(4): 361–375 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.002
46	T L Bezerra, A J Ragauskas. A review of sugarcane bagasse for second-generation bioethanol and biopower production. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 2016, 6: 246–256
47	FAO. Part 3: Feeding the world. In: FAO Statistical Yearbook, 2013: 123–158
48	H. Macauley Cereal crops: rice, maize, millet, sorghum, wheat. In: Conference of Feeding Africa: An action plan for African agricultural transformation, Dakar, Senegal, 2015, 1–36
49	Y Assefa, K Roozeboom, C Thompson, et al. Corn and Grain Sorghum Comparison: All Things Considered. Oxford and Waltham: Academic Press, 2014
50	J E Olesen, M Trnka, K C Kersebaum, et al. Impacts and adaptation of European crop production systems to climate change. European Journal of Agronomy, 2011, 34(2): 96–112 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2010.11.003
51	E C Oerke, H W Dehne. Safeguarding production–losses in major crops and the role of crop protection. Crop Protection (Guildford, Surrey), 2004, 23(4): 275–285 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2003.10.001
52	H Willer, J Lernoud, B Huber, et al. The World of Organic Agriculture–Statistics and Emerging Trends. Bonn: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 2015
53	C Wrigley, H Corke, K Seetharaman, et al. Encyclopedia of Food Grains. Academic Press, 2015
54	J Medina, C Monreal, J M Barea, et al. Crop residue stabilization and application to agricultural and degraded soils: a review. Waste Management, 2015, 42: 41–54 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.04.002
55	NASA.Technology readiness level. 2019–11–17, available at the website of NASA
56	D. Bacovsky Production facilities. 2020–4-25, available at website of ETIP Bioenergy
57	Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Integrated biorefineries. 2020–4-25, available at the website of Department of Energy
58	N S Bentsen, C Felby. Biomass for energy in the European Union–a review of bioenergy resource assessments. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2012, 5(1): 25 https://doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-5-25
59	T Beringer, W Lucht, S Schaphoff. Bioenergy production potential of global biomass plantations under environmental and agricultural constraints. Global Change Biology. Bioenergy, 2011, 3(4): 299–312 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01088.x
60	E Uçkun Kıran, A P Trzcinski, Y Liu. Platform chemical production from food wastes using a biorefinery concept. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology (Oxford, Oxfordshire), 2015, 90(8): 1364–1379 https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.4551
61	N Gontard, U Sonesson, M Birkved, et al. A research challenge vision regarding management of agricultural waste in a circular bio-based economy. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2018, 48(6): 614–654 https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2018.1471957
62	C Aouf, S Benyahya, A Esnouf, et al. Tara tannins as phenolic precursors of thermosetting epoxy resins. European Polymer Journal, 2014, 55: 186–198 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2014.03.034
63	E de Jong, A Higson, P Walsh, et al. Bio-based chemicals: value added products from Biorefineries. IEA Bioenergy–Task 42 Biorefinery, 2012
64	European Bioplastic. Bioplastics market data. 2018–9-25, available at the website of european-bioplastics
65	Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2019–2028. 2019, available at the website of FAO
66	J Philp. Policies for bioplastics in the context of a bioeconomy. OECD Science, Tecnology and Industry Policy Papers, 2014 https://doi.org/10.1787/5k3xpf9rrw6d-en
67	T Newton. Coffee isn’t world’s 2nd-most traded commodity (but it’s important). Perfect Daily Grind. 2020–9-28, available at the website of perfectdailygrind
68	J Wagner. International trade in goods statistics by product Exports 2001–2019. International Trade in Goods, 2019, available at the website of intracen
69	Conab. Monitoring the Brazilian coffee crop. Quarto levantamento. Brasília, 2019 (in Portuguese)
70	P Esquivel, V M Jiménez. Functional properties of coffee and coffee by-products. Food Research International, 2012, 46(2): 488–495 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2011.05.028
71	A L Orozco, M I Pérez, O Guevara, et al. Biotechnological enhancement of coffee pulp residues by solid-state fermentation with Streptomyces. Py–GC/MS analysis. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, 2008, 81(2): 247–252 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2007.12.002
72	A Pandey, C R Soccol, D Mitchell. New developments in solid state fermentation: I-bioprocesses and products. Process Biochemistry, 2000, 35(10): 1153–1169 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-9592(00)00152-7
73	N S Caetano, D Caldeira, A A Martins, et al. Valorisation of spent coffee grounds: production of biodiesel via enzymatic catalysis with ethanol and a co-solvent. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 2017, 8(6): 1981–1994 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-016-9790-z
74	N Kondamudi, S K Mohapatra, M Misra. Spent coffee grounds as a versatile source of green energy. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2008, 56(24): 11757–11760 https://doi.org/10.1021/jf802487s
75	P Mazzafera. Degradation of caffeine by microorganisms and potential use of decaffeinated coffee husk and pulp in animal feeding. Scientia Agrícola, 2002, 59(4): 815–821 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162002000400030
76	D I Givens, W P Barber. In vivo evaluation of spent coffee grounds as a ruminant feed. Agricultural Wastes, 1986, 18(1): 69–72 https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-4607(86)90108-3
77	A S G Costa, R C Alves, A F Vinha, et al. Nutritional, chemical and antioxidant/pro-oxidant profiles of silverskin, a coffee roasting by-product. Food Chemistry, 2018, 267: 28–35 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.03.106
78	M Hijosa-Valsero, J Garita-Cambronero, A I Paniagua-García, et al. Biobutanol production from coffee silverskin. Microbial Cell Factories, 2018, 17: 154
79	D Licursi, C Antonetti, S Fulignati, et al. Smart valorization of waste biomass: exhausted lemon peels, coffee silverskins and paper wastes for the production of levulinic acid. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2018, 65: 637–642 https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1865107
80	P S Murthy, M Madhava Naidu, P Srinivas. Production of α-amylase under solid-state fermentation utilizing coffee waste. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology (Oxford, Oxfordshire), 2009, 84(8): 1246–1249 https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2142
81	A Cerda, L Mejías, T Gea, et al. Cellulase and xylanase production at pilot scale by solid-state fermentation from coffee husk using specialized consortia: the consistency of the process and the microbial communities involved. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 243: 1059–1068 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.07.076
82	P Antier, A Minjares, S Roussos, et al. Pectinase-hyperproducing mutants of Aspergillus niger C28B25 for solid-state fermentation of coffee pulp. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 1993, 15(3): 254–260 https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0229(93)90146-S
83	S H Sung, Y Chang, J Han. Development of polylactic acid nanocomposite films reinforced with cellulose nanocrystals derived from coffee silverskin. Carbohydrate Polymers, 2017, 169: 495–503 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.04.037
84	R Carnier, R S Berton, A R Coscione, et al. Coffee silverskin and expired coffee powder used as organic fertilizers. Coffee Science, 2019, 14(1): 24 https://doi.org/10.25186/cs.v14i1.1514
85	N Qureshi, B C Saha, M A Cotta. Butanol production from wheat straw hydrolysate using Clostridium beijerinckii. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 2007, 30(6): 419–427 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-007-0137-9
86	P N Navya, S M Pushpa. Production, statistical optimization and application of endoglucanase from Rhizopus stolonifer utilizing coffee husk. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 2013, 36(8): 1115–1123 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-012-0865-3
87	M Dias, M M Melo, R F Schwan, et al. A new alternative use for coffee pulp from semi-dry process to β-glucosidase production by Bacillus subtilis. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2015, 61(6): 588–595 https://doi.org/10.1111/lam.12498
88	K Selvam, M Govarthanan, S Kamala-Kannan, et al. Process optimization of cellulase production from alkali-treated coffee pulp and pineapple waste using Acinetobacter sp. TSK-MASC. RSC Advances, 2014, 4(25): 13045–13051 https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA00066H
89	F Battista, D Fino, G Mancini. Optimization of biogas production from coffee production waste. Bioresource Technology, 2016, 200: 884–890 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.11.020
90	V A B Hermosa. Use of residues from semi-dry coffee processing to produce value-added compounds. Dissertation for the Master’s Degree. Lavras: Universidade Federal de Lavras, 2014 (in Portuguese)
91	C M M Machado, C R Soccol, B H De Oliveira, et al. Gibberellic acid production by solid-state fermentation in coffee husk. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology–Part A Enzyme Engineering and Biotechnology, 2002, 102–103(1-6): 179–192 https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:102-103:1-6:179
92	M Dias. Utilization of coffee processing residues for the production of carotenoids by yeasts and bacteria. Dissertations for the Doctoral Degree. Lavras: Universidade Federal de Lavras, 2016 (in Portuguese)
93	D Salmones, G Mata, K N Waliszewski. Comparative culturing of Pleurotus spp. on coffee pulp and wheat straw: biomass production and substrate biodegradation. Bioresource Technology, 2005, 96(5): 537–544 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2004.06.019
94	T H Nguyen , C H Ra, I Y Sunwoo , et al. Bioethanol production from soybean residue via separate hydrolysis and fermentation. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2018, 184: 513–523 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-017-2565-6
95	D M Pereira. Evaluation of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory capacity of soy protein isolate, okara and its hydrolysates. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 2017 (in Portuguese)
96	V A Queiroz Santos, C G Nascimento, C A P Schmidt, et al. Solid-state fermentation of soybean okara: isoflavones biotransformation, antioxidant activity and enhancement of nutritional quality. LWT, 2018, 92: 509–515 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2018.02.067
97	C Rodrigues, L P S Vandenberghe, L D Goyzueta, et al. Production, extraction and purification of gibberellic acid by solid state fermentation using citric pulp and soy husk. BAOJ Chemistry, 2016, 2(2): 014
98	J R B Cunha, F C P Santos, F G V Assis, et al. Cultivation of Penicillium spp.in soybean crop residues for cellulase, protease and amylase production. Revista Ceres, 2016, 63: 597–604 (in Portuguese) https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-737x201663050002
99	J Tombini. Production of fungal lipase from by-products of soybean processing. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná, 2015 (in Portuguese)
100	S Ellilä, L Fonseca, C Uchima, J Cota, et al. Development of a low-cost cellulase production process using Trichoderma reesei for Brazilian biorefineries. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2017, 10(1): 30 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-017-0717-0
101	L Cunha, R Martarello, P M De Souza, et al. Optimization of xylanase production from Aspergillus foetidus in soybean residue. Enzyme Research, 2018: 6597017 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6597017
102	J Zhu, Y Zheng, F Xu, et al. Solid-state anaerobic co-digestion of hay and soybeanprocessing waste for biogas production. Bio-resource Technology, 2014, 154: 240–247 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.12.045
103	J F O Granjo, B P M Duarte, N M C Oliveira. Integrated production of biodiesel in a soybean biorefinery: modeling, simulation and economical assessment. Energy, 2017, 129: 273–291 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.03.167
104	M L de Moraes Filho, M Busanello, S H Prudencio, et al. Soymilk with okara flour fermented by Lactobacillus acidophilus: simplex-centroid mixture design applied in the elaboration of probiotic creamy sauce and storage stability. LWT, 2018, 93: 339–345 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2018.03.046
105	S K Khare, K Jha, A P Gandhi. Citric acid production from okara (soy-residue) by solid-state fermentation. Bioresource Technology, 1995, 54(3): 323–325 https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-8524(95)00155-7
106	W Wanmolee, W Sornlake, N Rattanaphan, et al. Biochemical characterization and synergism of cellulolytic enzyme system from Chaetomium globosum on rice straw saccharification. BMC Biotechnology, 2016, 16(1): 82 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12896-016-0312-7
107	J K Sekhon, K A Rosentrater, S Jung, et al. Effect of co-products of enzyme-assisted aqueous extraction of soybeans, enzymes, and surfactant on oil recovery from integrated corn-soy fermentation. Industrial Crops and Products. Elsevier, 2018, 121: 441–451 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.05.033
108	D Szczerbowski, A P Pitarelo, A Zandoná Filho, et al. Sugarcane biomass for biorefineries: comparative composition of carbohydrate and non-carbohydrate components of bagasse and straw. Carbohydrate Polymers, 2014, 114: 95–101 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.07.052
109	Renewable Fuels Association. Building partnerships \| growing markets 2017 ethanol industry outlook. In: Henderson M, Koehler N, Seurer J, Dinneen B, eds. National Ethanol Conference, 2017
110	L R de Souza Moreira, M de Carvalho Campos, P H V M de Siqueira, et al. Two β-xylanases from Aspergillus terreus: characterization and influence of phenolic compounds on xylanase activity. Fungal Genetics and Biology, 2013, 60: 46–52 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fgb.2013.07.006
111	M Camassola, A J P Dillon. Effect of different pretreatment of sugar cane bagasse on cellulase and xylanases production by the mutant Penicillium echinulatum 9A02S1 grown in submerged culture. BioMed Research International, 2014: 720740 https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/720740
112	B P Prajapati, U K Jana, R K Suryawanshi, et al. Sugarcane bagasse saccharification using Aspergillus tubingensis enzymatic cocktail for 2G bio-ethanol production. Renewable Energy, 2020, 152: 653–663 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.01.063
113	L Jain, D Agrawal. Performance evaluation of fungal cellulases with dilute acid pretreated sugarcane bagasse: a robust bioprospecting strategy for biofuel enzymes. Renewable Energy, 2018, 115: 978–988 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.09.021
114	S Kumar, H K Sharma, B C Sarkar. Effect of substrate and fermentation conditions on pectinase and cellulase production by Aspergillus niger NCIM 548 in submerged (SmF) and solid state fermentation (SSF). Food Science and Biotechnology, 2011, 20(5): 1289–1298 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-011-0178-3
115	D S Xue, H Y Chen, D Q Lin, et al. Optimization of a natural medium for cellulase by a marine Aspergillus niger using response surface methodology. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2012, 167(7): 1963–1972 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-012-9734-4
116	L Gelain, J G da Cruz Pradella, A C da Costa. Mathematical modeling of enzyme production using Trichoderma harzianum P49P11 and sugarcane bagasse as carbon source. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 198: 101–107 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.148
117	Y C He, D Q Xia, C L Ma, et al. Enzymatic saccharification of sugarcane bagasse by N-methylmorpholine-N-oxide-tolerant cellulase from a newly isolated Galactomyces sp. CCZU11–1. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 18–22 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.156
118	T Mokomele, L da Costa Sousa, B Bals, et al. Using steam explosion or AFEXTM to produce animal feeds and biofuel feedstocks in a biorefinery based on sugarcane residues. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 2018, 12(6): 978–996 https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1927
119	L M Schmidt, L D Mthembu, P Reddy, et al. Levulinic acid production integrated into a sugarcane bagasse based biorefinery using thermal-enzymatic pretreatment. Industrial Crops and Products, 2017, 99: 172–178 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.02.010
120	F C R Almeida, A Sales, J P Moretti, et al. Sugarcane bagasse ash sand (SBAS): Brazilian agroindustrial by-product for use in mortar. Construction and Building Materials. Elsevier Ltd, 2015, 82: 31–38 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.02.039
121	L G T Carpio, F S De Souza. Competition between second-generation ethanol and bioelectricity using the residual biomass of sugarcane: effects of uncertainty on the production mix. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2019, 24: 1–15
122	L M S Menandro, H Cantarella, H C J Franco, et al. Comprehensive assessment of sugarcane straw: implications for biomass and bioenergy production. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 2017, 11(3): 488–504 https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1760
123	X You, A van Heiningen, H Sixta, et al. Lignin and ash balances of sulfur dioxide-ethanol-water fractionation of sugarcane straw. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 244: 1111–1120 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.08.097
124	A F Hernández-Pérez, P V de Arruda, M G A Felipe. Sugarcane straw as a feedstock for xylitol production by Candida guilliermondii FTI 20037. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, 2016, 47(2): 489–496 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjm.2016.01.019
125	R G Candido, A R Gonçalves. Synthesis of cellulose acetate and carboxymethylcellulose from sugarcane straw. Carbohydrate Polymers, 2016, 152: 679–686 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2016.07.071
126	A P Mariano, M O S Dias, T L Junqueira, et al. Butanol production in a first-generation Brazilian sugarcane biorefinery: technical aspects and economics of greenfield projects. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 316–323 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.09.109
127	D Robl, S Costa, F Büchli, et al. Bioresource technology enhancing of sugar cane bagasse hydrolysis by Annulohypoxylon stygium glycohydrolases. Bioresorce Technology, 2015,177: 247–254
128	L R de Souza Moreira, M de Carvalho Campos, P H V M de Siqueira, et al. Two beta-xylanases from Aspergillus terreus: characterization and influence of phenolic compounds on xylanase activity. Fungal Genetics and Biology, 2013, 60: 46–52 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fgb.2013.07.006
129	B Pratto, R B A de Souza, R Sousa Jr, et al. Enzymatic hydrolysis of pretreated sugarcane straw: kinetic study and semi-mechanistic modeling. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2016, 178(7): 1430–1444 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-015-1957-8
130	Q Jin, L Yang, N Poe, et al. Integrated processing of plant-derived waste to produce value-added products based on the biorefinery concept. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2018, 74: 119–131 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.02.014
131	H Huang, W Liu, V Singh, et al. Effect of harvest moisture content on selected yellow dent corn: dry-grind fermentation characteristics and ddgs composition. Cereal Chemistry, 2012, 89(4): 217–221 https://doi.org/10.1094/CCHEM-11-11-0142
132	B Bals, B Dale, V Balan. Enzymatic hydrolysis of distiller’s dry grain and solubles (DDGS) using ammonia fiber expansion pretreatment. Energy & Fuels, 2006, 20(6): 2732–2736 https://doi.org/10.1021/ef060299s
133	N A B M Zaini, A Chatzifragkou, D Charalampopoulos. Microbial production of d-lactic acid from dried distiller’s grains with solubles. Engineering in Life Sciences, 2018
134	K Y Foo. Value-added utilization of maize cobs waste as an environmental friendly solution for the innovative treatment of carbofuran. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2016, 100: 295–304 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2016.01.020
135	S M Miraboutalebi, S K Nikouzad, M Peydayesh, et al. Methylene blue adsorption via maize silk powder: kinetic, equilibrium, thermodynamic studies and residual error analysis. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2017, 106: 191–202 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.01.010
136	S Indah, D Helard, A Sasmita. Utilization of maize husk (Zea mays L.) as low-cost adsorbent in removal of iron from aqueous solution. Water Science and Technology, 2016, 73(12): 2929–2935 https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2016.154
137	U Guyo, T Makawa, M Moyo, et al. Application of response surface methodology for Cd(II) adsorption on maize tassel-magnetite nanohybrid adsorbent. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2015, 3(4): 2472–2483 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2015.09.006
138	F A Agblevor, M M Ibrahim, W K El-Zawawy. Coupled acid and enzyme mediated production of microcrystalline cellulose from corn cob and cotton gin waste. Cellulose (London, England), 2007, 14(3): 247–256 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-006-9103-y
139	V B Veljković, M O Biberdžić, I B Banković-Ilić, et al. Biodiesel production from corn oil: a review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018, 91: 531–548 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.024
140	T M Mata, I R B G Sousa, S S Vieira, et al. Biodiesel production from corn oil via enzymatic catalysis with ethanol. Energy & Fuels, 2012, 26(5): 3034–3041 https://doi.org/10.1021/ef300319f
141	T Böjti, K L Kovöcs, B Kakuk, et al. Pretreatment of poultry manure for efficient biogas production as monosubstrate or co-fermentation with maize silage and corn stover. Anaerobe, 2017, 46: 138–145 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2017.03.017
142	A K Samanta, S Senani, A P Kolte, et al. Production and in vitro evaluation of xylooligosaccharides generated from corn cobs. Food and Bioproducts Processing, 2012, 90(3): 466–474 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2011.11.001
143	N Pérez-Rodríguez, D García-Bernet, J M Domínguez. Extrusion and enzymatic hydrolysis as pretreatments on corn cob for biogas production. Renewable Energy, 2017, 107: 597–603 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.02.030
144	L Xia, P Cen. Cellulase production by solid state fermentation on lignocellulosic waste from the xylose industry. Process Bioche-mistry, 1999, 34(9): 909–912 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-9592(99)00015-1
145	M Kapoor, D Panwar, G S Kaira. Bioprocesses for enzyme production using agro-industrial wastes: technical challenges and commercialization potential. In: Dhillon G S, Kaur S, eds. Agro-industrial Wastes as Feedstock for Enzyme Production: Apply and Exploit the Emerging and Valuable Use Options of Waste Biomass. Academic Press, 2016
146	F Talebnia, D Karakashev, I Angelidaki. Production of bioethanol from wheat straw: an overview on pretreatment, hydrolysis and fermentation. Bioresource Technology, 2010, 101(13): 4744–4753 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.080
147	I Ballesteros, M J Negro, J M Oliva, et al. Ethanol production from steam-explosion pretreated wheat straw. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2006, 130(1-3): 496–508 https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:130:1:496
148	G Mancini, S Papirio, P N L Lens, et al. Increased biogas production from wheat straw by chemical pretreatments. Renewable Energy, 2018, 119: 608–614 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.045
149	P Kaparaju, M Serrano, A B Thomsen, et al. Bioethanol, biohydrogen and biogas production from wheat straw in a biorefinery concept. Bioresource Technology, 2009, 100(9): 2562–2568 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.11.011
150	V B H Dang, H D Doan, T Dang-Vu, et al. Equilibrium and kinetics of biosorption of cadmium(II) and copper(II) ions by wheat straw. Bioresource Technology, 2009, 100(1): 211–219 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.05.031
151	L Chen, F Hong, X Yang, et al. Biotransformation of wheat straw to bacterial cellulose and its mechanism. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 464–468 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.029
152	C Chang, P Cen, X Ma. Levulinic acid production from wheat straw. Bioresource Technology, 2007, 98(7): 1448–1453 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2006.03.031
153	R Zhang, X Li, J G Fadel. Oyster mushroom cultivation with rice and wheat straw. Bioresource Technology, 2002, 82(3): 277–284 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00188-2
154	M Pourbafrani, G Forgács, I S Horváth, et al. Production of biofuels, limonene and pectin from citrus wastes. Bioresource Technology, 2010, 101(11): 4246–4250 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.01.077
155	M Boluda-Aguilar, A López-Gómez. Production of bioethanol by fermentation of lemon (Citrus limon L.) peel wastes pretreated with steam explosion. Industrial Crops and Products, 2013, 41: 188–197 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.04.031
156	S Muthayya, J D Sugimoto, S Montgomery, et al. An overview of global rice production, supply, trade, and consumption. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2014, 1324(1): 7–14 https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12540
157	J O Bienvenido. Rice straw. Rice Knowledge Bank, 2016, available at the website of knowledgebank
158	T Kogo, Y Yoshida, K Koganei, et al. Production of rice straw hydrolysis enzymes by the fungi Trichoderma reesei and Humicola insolens using rice straw as a carbon source. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 233: 67–73 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.01.075
159	G M Bohlmann. Process economic considerations for production of ethanol from biomass feedstocks. Industrial Biotechnology (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2006, 2(1): 14–20 https://doi.org/10.1089/ind.2006.2.14
160	S Pinzi, M P Dorado. Vegetable-based feedstocks for biofuels production. In: Luque R, Campelo J, Clark J, eds. Handbook of Biofuels Production: Processes and Technologies. Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2011 https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857090492.1.61
161	M Saritha, A Arora, S Singh, et al. Streptomyces griseorubens mediated delignification of paddy straw for improved enzymatic saccharification yields. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 12–17 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.11.040
162	R Tiwari, S Rana, S Singh, et al. Biological delignification of paddy straw and Parthenium sp. using a novel micromycete Myrothecium roridum LG7 for enhanced saccharification. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 7–11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.12.079
163	P Moniz, L João, L C Duarte, et al. Fractionation of hemicelluloses and lignin from rice straw by combining autohydrolysis and optimised mild organosolv delignification. BioResources, 2015, 10(2): 2626–2641 https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.10.2.2626-2641
164	P Moniz, H Pereira, L C Duarte, et al. Hydrothermal production and gel filtration purification of xylo-oligosaccharides from rice straw. Industrial Crops and Products, 2014, 62: 460–465 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.09.020
165	A Mohammadi, A L Cowie, O Cacho, et al. Biochar addition in rice farming systems: economic and energy benefits. Energy, 2017, 140: 415–425 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.08.116
166	P T M Do, T Ueda, R Kose, et al. Properties and potential use of biochars from residues of two rice varieties, Japanese Koshihikari and Vietnamese IR50404. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 2019, 21(1): 98–106 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-018-0768-8
167	D H Nguyen, L A Zenitova, Q D Le, et al. Use of burn rice residues for production of nanosilica. Butlerov Communications, 2019, 57: 155–161
168	W H Chen, Y C Chen, J G Lin. Evaluation of biobutanol production from non-pretreated rice straw hydrolysate under non-sterile environmental conditions. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 262–268 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.140
169	I Kim, M S U Rehman, K H Kim, et al. Generation of electricity from FeCl3 pretreatment of rice straw using a fuel cell system. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 135: 635–639 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.07.046
170	D Barana, A Salanti, M Orlandi, et al. Biorefinery process for the simultaneous recovery of lignin, hemicelluloses, cellulose nanocrystals and silica from rice husk and Arundo donax. Industrial Crops and Products, 2016, 86: 31–39 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.03.029
171	D B Rivers. Biomass conversion technology: thoughts on the path forward to comercial adoption. Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining, 2012, 6: 246–256
172	M Farias. Fire hits straw stock of the company Granbio in AL again. 2019–11–28, available at the website of globo
173	Office of Energy efficiency & renewable energy. POET-DSM: project libert. 2020–4-25, available at the website of Department of Energy
174	U De Corato, I De Bari, E Viola, et al. Assessing the main opportunities of integrated biorefining from agro-bioenergy co/by-products and agroindustrial residues into high-value added products associated to some emerging markets: a review. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2018, 88: 326–346 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.041
175	H K Gibbs, L Rausch, J Munger, et al. Brazil’s soy moratorium: supply-chain governance is needed to avoid deforestation. Science, 2015, 347(6220): 377–378 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa0181
176	M O’Hare, M Delucchi, R Edwards, et al. Comment on “Indirect land use change for biofuels: testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies” by Kim and Dale: statistical reliability and the definition of the indirect land use change (iLUC) issue. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011, 35(10): 4485–4487 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.08.004
177	L E Hombach, C Cambero, T Sowlati, et al. Optimal design of supply chains for second generation biofuels incorporating European biofuel regulations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 133: 565–575 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.107
178	R J Plevin, A D Jones, M S Torn, et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels’ indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. Environmental Science & Technology, 2010, 44(21): 8015–8021 https://doi.org/10.1021/es101946t
179	S Kim, B E Dale. Indirect land use change for biofuels: testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011, 35(7): 3235–3240 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.04.039
180	G Sorda, M Banse, C Kemfert. An overview of biofuel policies across the world. Energy Policy, 2010, 38: 6977–6988

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed