Microbial Enzyme Systems in the Production of Second Generation Bioethanol

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Sanjeev Kumar, Ioanna, Sugar, Ways, South, Resources, Brazil, Four, Plant, Doi, India, January, Sharma, Basel, Brans, Sanjeev, Standard, Life, Wood, Urban, Risk, Kumar, Strain, Arabia, Carbon, December, Germany, China, February, Root, Areas, Raman, Iran, Agro, Under, Put, Rise, Open, Energy, Chemical, Living, Due, Cane, Non, Rich, Strong, Jobs, Argentina, Africa, Tel, Ton, Rising, House, Canada, Soni, Focus]

Citation: Soni, S.K.; Sharma, A.; Soni, R. Microbial Enzyme Systems in the Production of Second Generation Bioethanol Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su 15043590 Academic Editor: Ioanna Ntaikou Received: 18 December 2022 Revised: 31 January 2023 Accepted: 13 February 2023 Published: 15 February 2023 Copyright: © 2023 by the authors Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/) sustainability Review Microbial Enzyme Systems in the Production of Second Generation Bioethanol Sanjeev Kumar Soni 1, * , Apurav Sharma 1 and Raman Soni 2 1 Department of Microbiology, Panjab University, Chandigarh 160014, India 2 Department of Biotechnology, D.A.V. College, Chandigarh 160011, India * Correspondence: sonisk@pu.ac.in; Tel.: +91-941-735-1062 Abstract: The primary contributor to global warming has been the careless usage of fossil fuels Urbanization’s threat to the depletion of these resources has made it necessary to find alternatives due to the rising demand. Four different forms of biofuels are now available and constitute a possible replacement for fossil fuels. The first generation of biofuels is generated from the edible portion of biomass, the second generation is made from the non-edible portion of biomass, the third generation is made from algal biomass, and the fourth generation is made using molecular biology to improve the algal strain. Second-generation biofuels are extremely important because they are derived from non-edible biomass, such as agricultural and agro-industrial wastes rich in cellulose, hemicellulose, pectin, and starch impregnated with lignin, and are hydrolyzed after delignification by physio-chemical or biological pretreatments using ligninases. The enzymes involved in the hydrolysis of feedstocks for the production of second-generation bioethanol, a highly acceptable biofuel, are discussed in this article. Furthermore, the article discusses various fermentation technologies as well as significant developments in second-generation biofuel production by combining various microbial enzyme systems Keywords: biofuels; bioethanol; lignocellulose; cellulases; amylases; hemicellulases 1. Introduction Society’s advancement has raised the standard of living and made jobs easier, but it has also resulted in environmental issues as a result of excessive use of automobiles, machines, and other items, which has contributed to the depletion of fossil fuel sources. Urban areas house 52.5% of the world’s population, with that figure expected to rise to 70% by 2050 [ 1 ]. This urbanization is causing excessive use of fossil fuels in the transportation sector. Cities contribute significantly to CO 2 emissions and the indiscriminate use of fossil fuels has put their reserves at risk [ 2 ]. Annual global carbon dioxide emissions are increasing and are expected to reach 38,836.98 MT (Metric Ton) in 2025. China’s expected CO 2 emissions in 2025 are 11,521.21 MT, the United States’ is 11,521.21 MT, India’s is 3158.37 MT, Canada’s is 699.65 MT, Brazil’s is 605.61 MT, Argentina’s is 207.44 MT, Germany’s is 738.77 MT, Turkey’s is 374.40 MT, Iran’s is 822.46 MT, Saudi Arabia’s is 714.08 MT, South Africa’s is 338.17 MT and Japan’s is 1091.78 MT [ 3 ]. This has prompted researchers all over the world to focus on environmentally friendly alternatives to fossil fuels. Biofuels are one type of such fuel that emits fewer GHGs over their entire life cycle [ 4 ]. A biofuel is any fuel that is made from plant biomass and can generate energy for use in a variety of ways [ 5 ]. For the production of biofuels and energy, biomass that primarily consists of starchy crops, such as cereals, and root tubers, sugary crops, such as sugar cane and beet, agricultural residues, such as grasses, straws, bagasse, and brans, forestry crops, wood processing residues, dedicated energy crops, and biodegradable municipal solid waste, can be used [ 6 ]. Solid, liquid, or gaseous biofuels are all possible. Wood, and refuse-derived fuel (RDF), are some examples of solid biofuels. Biodiesel, biomethanol, bioethanol, biobutanol, etc are examples of liquid Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590. https://doi.org/10.3390/su 15043590 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Forest, Meet, Natural, Range, Modern, Deal, Less, Rice, Gain, Level, Better, Eco, Juice, Low, Europe, Net, Barley, Present, Great, Development, Trend, Corn, Share, Tools, Asia, Pace, Major, Year, Palm, Web, Cost, Wheat, Last, Given, Reason, Market, Rate, Parts, Goal, Oil, Short, Solar]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 2 of 26 biofuels, while biohydrogen and biomethane are examples of gaseous biofuels. Given the increasing global biofuel consumption trend, major research attention has been directed toward feasible and low-cost biofuel resources, as reported by research publications in the last 20 years around the world, particularly in Asia, Europe, and the United States [ 7 ]. According to the proposed sustainable development scenario, biofuels must meet 9% of total transportation fuel demand by 2030, up from 3% in 2018. Between 2010 and 2021, the use of modern bioenergy increased by about 7% per year on average, and it is on the rise. More efforts are required to accelerate modern bioenergy deployment to meet the Net Zero Scenario. Biofuel production is not increasing at a rate sufficient to meet this demand, and it grew 6% year on year in 2019, with an average of 3% growth expected over the next five years, leaving total production short of 10% by 2030 to meet the pace required for sustainable development [ 8 ]. Food crops account for the majority of biofuels produced. For better sustainability, advanced biofuel production using non-food feedstocks must improve and gain a significant share of total biofuel production. Scaling up the production of these biofuels to a commercial level will require a great deal of effort and innovative research. Bioethanol and biomass-to-liquid synthetic fuels are among the most important advanced biofuels because they can be produced using low-cost, abundantly available feedstocks such as agricultural and agro-industrial residues [ 9 , 10 ]. Traditional biofuels are made from edible feedstocks such as sugar cane juice, molasses, sugar beet juice, molasses, cereals such as corn, rice, barley, wheat, sorghum, and oils such as soybean oil and palm oil. These are known as first-generation biofuels. Advanced biofuels are made from non-edible parts of biomass and are classified into three types based on the type of substrate used in the production process: second, third, and fourth-generation biofuels. Waste biomass resources such as agricultural, agro-industrial, municipal solid waste, and forest residue are used in second-generation biofuels. Third-generation biofuels are primarily made from algal biomass, which can be used to produce a wide range of biofuels and other value-added products [ 11 ]. The fourth generation of biofuels is a newer type that uses synthetic biology tools to create electro fuels and photobiological solar fuels by converting solar energy directly into fuels [ 12 , 13 ]. Recent concerns about the production of first-generation biofuels caused by the conflict between food and fuel have prompted experts to investigate alternative biofuel production routes [ 14 ]. According to numerous reports, the cost of food ingredients has risen due to the production of first-generation bioethanol [ 15 ]. The primary reason for preferring second-generation biofuels over firstgeneration biofuels is the use of waste and inedible agricultural biomass as a substrate for fuel generation. Because of its abundance and underutilization in comparison to other natural resources, lignocellulosic, agro-industrial, and biodegradable municipal solid waste biomass is a promising feedstock for the production of biofuels Due to the extensive food versus fuel debate associated with first-generation biofuels, the emphasis has shifted to the production of second-generation biofuels because the feedstock is easily accessible and has a less significant impact on the food web, water resources, and ecosystem [ 16 – 18 ]. The current methods for producing second-generation bioethanol are neither cost-effective nor eco-friendly [ 19 ]. As a result, the entire manufacturing process must be improved to be environmentally friendly and to make the cost of the fuel produced competitive with other fuels already on the market [ 20 , 21 ]. Biologically mediated lignocellulosic biomass conversion into biofuels appears to be more promising. The primary goal of this article is to review the environmentally friendly approaches used in biofuel production, with a focus on the enzymes used in the production of second-generation bioethanol, a highly acceptable liquid biofuel 2. Composition of Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Waste Biomass, the Feedstocks for Second Generation Bioethanol The majority of plant waste biomass, also known as lignocellulosics, consists primarily of carbohydrates in the form of cellulose, hemicellulose, and phenolic polymers such as lignin. Starch, pectin, proteins, acids, salts, and minerals are also present in varying amounts

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Bundle, Long, Chain, Dry, Kitchen, Architecture, Mannan, Stover, Cell, Table, Switch, Walls, Grass, Bran, Sweet, Bonds, General, Straw, Shown, Common]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 3 of 26 in some agro-industrial and biodegradable municipal solid waste biomass residues [ 18 ]. The structural composition of some common lignocellulosic biomass residues with the potential to be used as feedstocks in the production of second-generation ethanol, also known as cellulosic ethanol, is shown in Table 1 and discussed along with the structural architecture of pectin and starch, commonly found in agro-industrial wastes such as brans, spent grains and kitchen waste residues, etc Table 1. Lignocellulosic composition (%) of various agricultural wastes on a dry basis of the substrate Substrate Cellulose (%) Hemicellulose (%) Lignin (%) Reference Rice straw 32–47 19–27 5–24 [ 21 ] Rice husk 34.40 29.30 19.20 [ 22 ] Wheat straw 35–45 20–30 8–15 [ 21 ] Corn straw 42.60 21.30 8.20 [ 21 ] Corn cobs 45.00 35.00 15.00 [ 21 ] Corn stover 38.00 26.00 19.00 [ 23 ] Wheat bran 25.30 14.60 3.20 [ 24 ] Sugarcane bagasse 42.00 25–36 19–20 [ 16 ] Sweet sorghum 48–49 20–26 19–20 [ 25 ] Coconut fiber 36–43 0.15–0.25 41–45 [ 21 ] Cocoa pods husk 35 10 14 [ 26 ] Soft wood 40–44 25–29 25–31 [ 21 ] Banana fiber 60–65 6–8 5–10 [ 21 ] Switch grass 36–38 27 17–19 [ 27 ] De-oiled rice bran 9.80 20.60 3.90 [ 28 ] Barley straw 31–45 27–38 14–19 [ 21 ] 2.1. Cellulose (C 6 H 10 O 5 ) n One of the major constituents of plant cell walls which is abundantly available on earth is cellulose which exists as a fibrous structure. It is an unbranched long-chain polymer consisting of several repeated units of cellobiose which are linked to each other by β -1,4- glycosidic bonds [ 29 ]. These long chains of cellulose are linked together by Van der Waals and hydrogen bonds packing the cellulose into microfibrils which further bundle together to build cellulose fibers. The straightness of the chain is determined by the hydrogen bonds within these microfibrils. The crystalline and amorphous structures within the cellulose are introduced by interchain hydrogen bonding which imparts order or disorder to the cellulose structure [ 18 ]. 2.2. Hemicellulose (C 5 H 8 O 4 ) n Hemicellulose is the second notable and prevalent polymer in plant waste. Being chemically heterogeneous sets it apart from cellulose. These pentoses (xylose, rhamnose, and arabinose), hexoses (glucose, mannose, and galactose), and uronic acids (4-o-methylglucuronic, D-glucuronic acids) are branching, heterogeneous polymers [ 29 ]. In various materials, hemicelluloses have varying proportions. For instance, conifers and hardwoods have widely different proportions and types of xylans and mannan. In conifers, galactoglucomananas (5–8%), arabinoglucouronoxilanes (7–15%), and glucomannan (10–15%) are the primary components, whereas glucomannans (2–5%) and glycoronoxilanes (15–35%) predominate in hardwoods. The primary hemicellulosic components of grass and cereal cell walls are arabinoxylans [ 18 ]. The general structure of hemicellulose is depicted in Figure 1 .

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Stage, Step, Barrier, Peer, Main, Wall, Acid, Lesser]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 4 of 26 Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 28 ilanes (15–35%) predominate in hardwoods. The primary hemicellulosic components of grass and cereal cell walls are arabinoxylans [18]. The general structure of hemicellulose is depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1. Generalized structure of hemicellulose (Xylan type) (Modified from [18]). 2.3. Lignin Lignin is the third polymer that is widely distributed in nature (Figure 2). This polymer, which is found in plant cell walls, gives the cell wall of the plant a strong defense against any microbial invasion. The major three forms of phenyl propane units found in lignin are guaiacyl propanol also known as coniferyl alcohol, syringyl alcohols also known as sinapyl alcohol, and p-hydroxyphenyl propanol also known as coumaryl alcohol. Lignin is primarily viewed as the glue that binds the various parts of lignocellulosic biomass together, making it water-insoluble. It is extremely challenging to hydrolyze biomass using enzymatic or microbiological processes because of how tightly lignin is bound to the cellulose structure [18,30]. Figure 2. Generalized structure of lignin (Modified from [18]). 2.4. Pectin Only a limited amount of pectin can be found in plant cell walls. Pectins are heteropolysaccharides comprised of 1,4-linked units of α -D-galactosyluronic acid residues. Rhamnogalacturonan-I, homogalacturonan, and substituted galacturonans are the three main pectins that have been identified from plant cell walls [31]. The general structure of pectin is shown in Figure 3. Figure 1. Generalized structure of hemicellulose (Xylan type) (Modified from [ 18 ]). 2.3. Lignin Lignin is the third polymer that is widely distributed in nature (Figure 2 ). This polymer, which is found in plant cell walls, gives the cell wall of the plant a strong defense against any microbial invasion. The major three forms of phenyl propane units found in lignin are guaiacyl propanol also known as coniferyl alcohol, syringyl alcohols also known as sinapyl alcohol, and p-hydroxyphenyl propanol also known as coumaryl alcohol. Lignin is primarily viewed as the glue that binds the various parts of lignocellulosic biomass together, making it water-insoluble. It is extremely challenging to hydrolyze biomass using enzymatic or microbiological processes because of how tightly lignin is bound to the cellulose structure [ 18 , 30 ]. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 28 ilanes (15–35%) predominate in hardwoods. The primary hemicellulosic components of grass and cereal cell walls are arabinoxylans [18]. The general structure of hemicellulose is depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1. Generalized structure of hemicellulose (Xylan type) (Modified from [18]). 2.3. Lignin Lignin is the third polymer that is widely distributed in nature (Figure 2). This polymer, which is found in plant cell walls, gives the cell wall of the plant a strong defense against any microbial invasion. The major three forms of phenyl propane units found in lignin are guaiacyl propanol also known as coniferyl alcohol, syringyl alcohols also known as sinapyl alcohol, and p-hydroxyphenyl propanol also known as coumaryl alcohol. Lignin is primarily viewed as the glue that binds the various parts of lignocellulosic biomass together, making it water-insoluble. It is extremely challenging to hydrolyze biomass using enzymatic or microbiological processes because of how tightly lignin is bound to the cellulose structure [18,30]. Figure 2. Generalized structure of lignin (Modified from [18]). 2.4. Pectin Only a limited amount of pectin can be found in plant cell walls. Pectins are heteropolysaccharides comprised of 1,4-linked units of α -D-galactosyluronic acid residues. Rhamnogalacturonan-I, homogalacturonan, and substituted galacturonans are the three main pectins that have been identified from plant cell walls [31]. The general structure of pectin is shown in Figure 3. Figure 2. Generalized structure of lignin (Modified from [ 18 ]). 2.4. Pectin Only a limited amount of pectin can be found in plant cell walls. Pectins are heteropolysaccharides comprised of 1,4-linked units of α -D-galactosyluronic acid residues Rhamnogalacturonan-I, homogalacturonan, and substituted galacturonans are the three main pectins that have been identified from plant cell walls [ 31 ]. The general structure of pectin is shown in Figure 3 . Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 28 Figure 3. Generalized structure of pectin (Modified from [31]). 2.5. Starch Glucose units in starch are connected by glycosidic linkages. Figure 4 shows the architecture of the two types of polymeric units that make it up: amylose and amylopectin. By α -1,4 glycosidic linkages, amylose is made up of linearly linked glucose units. Amylopectin is made up of linear glucose chains with an α -1,4 linkage that is joined to the side chains by α -1,6 linkage [32,33]. Figure 4. Generalized structure of starch. The preceding section summarised the various carbohydrates in the form of cellulose, hemicellulose, phenolic polymer, and other ingredients in lesser amounts such as pectin and starch that comprise the overall skeleton of agricultural and agro-industrial waste biomass used in the production of second-generation biofuels. Following the hydrolysis of polysaccharides into simpler sugar molecules to be converted into bioethanol, the phenolic polymers are disintegrated first for conversion into various value-added products. Many developed countries are investing heavily in microbial fermentation and product regeneration from lignocellulosic feedstock, which necessitates complete exploitation of the lignocellulosic biomass. Knowing the lignocellulosic biomass composition allows industries, researchers, and biorefineries to invest in and exploit microorganisms and their enzyme systems for the development of second-generation bioethanol. 3. Conversion of Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Residues into Bioethanol The development of a biorefinery for the production of numerous value-added products, including second-generation biofuels from plant biomass waste, has been the subject of extensive research. Effective cellulose utilization is crucial for making use of lignocellulosic biomass because it produces sugars that can be fermented further. But because lignin acts as a significant barrier to the existing carbohydrates, pretreatment is an extremely important step in the processing of biomass to disrupt lignin and hemicellulose for efficient hydrolysis of cellulose in the following stage. Pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis, and fermentation are the three primary processes in the bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into bioethanol [33–35]. Figure 3. Generalized structure of pectin (Modified from [ 31 ]). 2.5. Starch Glucose units in starch are connected by glycosidic linkages. Figure 4 shows the architecture of the two types of polymeric units that make it up: amylose and amylopectin. By

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Makes, Area]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 5 of 26 α -1,4 glycosidic linkages, amylose is made up of linearly linked glucose units. Amylopectin is made up of linear glucose chains with an α -1,4 linkage that is joined to the side chains by α -1,6 linkage [ 32 , 33 ]. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 28 Figure 3. Generalized structure of pectin (Modified from [31]). 2.5. Starch Glucose units in starch are connected by glycosidic linkages. Figure 4 shows the architecture of the two types of polymeric units that make it up: amylose and amylopectin. By α -1,4 glycosidic linkages, amylose is made up of linearly linked glucose units. Amylopectin is made up of linear glucose chains with an α -1,4 linkage that is joined to the side chains by α -1,6 linkage [32,33]. Figure 4. Generalized structure of starch. The preceding section summarised the various carbohydrates in the form of cellulose, hemicellulose, phenolic polymer, and other ingredients in lesser amounts such as pectin and starch that comprise the overall skeleton of agricultural and agro-industrial waste biomass used in the production of second-generation biofuels. Following the hydrolysis of polysaccharides into simpler sugar molecules to be converted into bioethanol, the phenolic polymers are disintegrated first for conversion into various value-added products. Many developed countries are investing heavily in microbial fermentation and product regeneration from lignocellulosic feedstock, which necessitates complete exploitation of the lignocellulosic biomass. Knowing the lignocellulosic biomass composition allows industries, researchers, and biorefineries to invest in and exploit microorganisms and their enzyme systems for the development of second-generation bioethanol. 3. Conversion of Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Residues into Bioethanol The development of a biorefinery for the production of numerous value-added products, including second-generation biofuels from plant biomass waste, has been the subject of extensive research. Effective cellulose utilization is crucial for making use of lignocellulosic biomass because it produces sugars that can be fermented further. But because lignin acts as a significant barrier to the existing carbohydrates, pretreatment is an extremely important step in the processing of biomass to disrupt lignin and hemicellulose for efficient hydrolysis of cellulose in the following stage. Pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis, and fermentation are the three primary processes in the bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into bioethanol [33–35]. Figure 4. Generalized structure of starch The preceding section summarised the various carbohydrates in the form of cellulose, hemicellulose, phenolic polymer, and other ingredients in lesser amounts such as pectin and starch that comprise the overall skeleton of agricultural and agro-industrial waste biomass used in the production of second-generation biofuels. Following the hydrolysis of polysaccharides into simpler sugar molecules to be converted into bioethanol, the phenolic polymers are disintegrated first for conversion into various value-added products Many developed countries are investing heavily in microbial fermentation and product regeneration from lignocellulosic feedstock, which necessitates complete exploitation of the lignocellulosic biomass. Knowing the lignocellulosic biomass composition allows industries, researchers, and biorefineries to invest in and exploit microorganisms and their enzyme systems for the development of second-generation bioethanol 3. Conversion of Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Residues into Bioethanol The development of a biorefinery for the production of numerous value-added products, including second-generation biofuels from plant biomass waste, has been the subject of extensive research. Effective cellulose utilization is crucial for making use of lignocellulosic biomass because it produces sugars that can be fermented further. But because lignin acts as a significant barrier to the existing carbohydrates, pretreatment is an extremely important step in the processing of biomass to disrupt lignin and hemicellulose for efficient hydrolysis of cellulose in the following stage. Pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis, and fermentation are the three primary processes in the bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into bioethanol [ 33 – 35 ]. 3.1. Pretreatment The fundamental obstacle to the generation of biofuels seems to be the resistant and crystalline structure of plant biomass [ 36 ]. Enzyme interaction with cellulose is necessary for enzymatic hydrolysis, however, cellulose’s crystalline structure makes enzymatic attacks difficult. The lignin and hemicellulose matrices are another obstacle because they operate as physical barriers that reduce the accessibility of activated cellulose to enzymes. Additionally, lignin reduces the effectiveness of enzymes by binding cellulase [ 37 ]. Therefore, a pretreatment technique is needed to soften the crystalline structure of plant biomass before enzymatic hydrolysis [ 38 ]. The pretreatment process alters the structure and composition of the biomass and increases the surface area of the cellulose, making it more porous and more accessible for enzymatic hydrolysis [ 39 – 41 ].

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Choice, Alkaline, Ball, Hammer, Hno, Field, Vii, Iii, Roll, High, Far, Koh, Need, Nano]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 6 of 26 3.1.1. Goal of Pretreatment Different pretreatment techniques have been proposed and put into practice for the maximum release of fermentable sugars from lignocellulosic biomass to improve the enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass and fermentation yields [ 42 , 43 ]. Pretreatment must have the following qualities to be effective: (i) it must be economical and environmentally friendly, (ii) the most lignin can be eliminated, (iii) minimum production of phenols, furans, and furfurals, which prevents fermentation, (iv) recovering lignin to create other products with extra value, (v) minimal energy required, (vi) pretreatment chemicals must be recovered for future use, (vii) minimum costs of operation and minimum labor needs 3.1.2. Factors Affecting the Choice of Pretreatment Several considerations need to be taken into account when choosing a pretreatment method for a certain feedstock. These variables primarily comprise the biomass’s total hemicellulose and lignin contents, cellulose’s degree of crystallization, polymerization, and permeability [ 44 – 46 ]. 3.1.3. Types of Pretreatments Different types of pretreatment technologies have been studied so far and basically, four types of strategies have been categorized including (i) mechanical or physical involving mechanical milling and exposure to high temperature using steam (ii) chemical involving the use of acids, bases, oxidizing agents or ionic liquids alone or in combination with steam and are energy intensive (iii) physicochemical involving acid or ammonia explosion which are also energy intensive, (iv) biological involving the microorganisms or microbial enzyme systems for disrupting lignin and hemicellulose. Table 2 summarises different pretreatment methodologies and their effects on biomass. Because this manuscript is about enzyme systems for the production of second-generation biofuels, biological pretreatment is more relevant here and will be discussed in detail hereafter Table 2. Various methods, processes, and their impact on lignocellulosic biomass during the pretreatment Nature of Pretreatment Method Process Impact Reference Mechanical or physical Milling Roll, ball, hammer, disk, and colloid milling Decreases polymerization and crystalline structure of cellulose, increases specific surface area [ 47 ] Extrusion Mixing, heating, and shearing of biomass Alterations in the physical and chemical structure. Defibrillation and fiber shortening [ 48 ] Pulse electric field A sudden burst of high voltage between 5.0–20.0 kV/cm for nano to milliseconds Disruption of the cell wall and electroporation [ 49 ] Microwave Irradiation with 2450 MHz microwaves (170–200 ◦ C) Alterations in the ultra-structure of cellulose, partially removes hemicelluloses and lignin [ 50 , 51 ] Chemical Acidic Treatment with dilute HCl, H 3 PO 4 , HNO 3 , H 2 SO 4 , acetic acid, citric acid, oxalic acid, maleic acid, fumaric acid, etc Hydrolysis of hemicellulose [ 9 ] Alkaline Treatment with dilute NaOH, KOH, Ca(OH) 2 , NH 4 OH Efficient removal of lignin [ 9 ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Faster, Acton, Mild, Cont, Hot, Brown, Mpa, Rot, Aid, Ruan, Alkali, Rastogi, Study, White, Target, Yan, Small]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 7 of 26 Table 2. Cont Nature of Pretreatment Method Process Impact Reference Physicochemical Wet Oxidation Treatment with oxidative agents such as peracetic acid, sodium chlorite, KMnO 4 , and H 2 O 2 at high temperatures Higher lignin and hemicelluloses solubilization [ 52 ] Organosolv Treatment with organic or aqueous–organic solvent systems with or without added catalysts in the temperature range of 100–250 ◦ C Hydrolysis of lignin and hemicellulose [ 53 ] Ammonia Fibre Expansion treatment (AFEX) Treatment with anhydrous or liquid ammonia at a temperature ranging from 90 to 100 ◦ C followed by a successive lowering of pressure Lignin removal [ 54 ] Steam Explosion Exposure to saturated steam under high pressure followed by a sudden lowering of pressure Lignin removal and hemicellulose solubilization [ 55 ] Liquid hot water Use of high temperature of 170 ◦ –230 ◦ C and pressure more than 5 MPa Removal of hemicelluloses [ 56 ] Biological Enzymes or microorganisms Acton of lignin-degrading enzymes such as peroxidases and laccases Lignin degradation [ 46 , 57 ] Biological Pretreatment Biological pretreatment uses less energy and is less harmful to the environment than chemical and physical procedures. Natural diversity includes a variety of ligninolytic and hemicellulolytic microorganisms that can be used for the pretreatment of biomass [ 38 ]. Because they destroy lignin and hemicellulose with only a small amount of cellulose, a variety of white, brown, and soft rot fungi have been employed for biological pretreatment [ 57 ]. White-rot fungi degrade lignin due to the presence of lignin-degrading enzymes including peroxidases and laccases. With the aid of mediators, laccase can directly target the nonphenolic and phenolic subunits of lignocellulosic biomass, causing structural changes [ 58 ]. Some of the white-rot fungal species that have been investigated for the biological pretreatment of biomass include Pycnoporus cinnarbarinus. Phanerochaete chrysosporium, Cyathus stercolerus, Ceriporia lacerata, Ceriporiopsis subvermispora, Pleurotus ostreaus. Other basidiomycetes used for biological pretreatment include Fomes fomentarius, Ganoderma resinaceum, Lepista nuda, Irpex lacteus, Trametes versicolor, and Pycnoporus sanguineus [ 59 – 64 ]. The biological pretreatment of the biomass can be accomplished in three different ways, which include the use of enzymes, a consortium of microorganisms, or fungi that can degrade lignin [ 22 ]. Ma and Ruan [ 65 ] explored simultaneous delignification and hydrolysis of corn stover by co-culturing Coprinus comatus and Trichoderma reesei. A range of white-rot fungi was investigated in a study to discover the optimum biological pretreatment for corn stover, and Cyathus stercoreus NRRL-6573 produced the highest carbohydrate conversion [ 62 ]. Although biological pretreatment has advantages, it is not favored on an industrial scale because it is too sluggish [ 66 ]. Therefore, for biological pretreatment to be applied at the industrial level, it is necessary to discover more fungi that can delignify biomass but at faster rates. Rastogi et al. [ 67 ] observed that Pyrenophora phaeocomes S-1 cultivation on rice straw led to 63 and 51% lignin and hemicellulose breakdown, respectively. Further extraction of these components using a mild alkali revealed that the overall losses for lignin and hemicellulose were 78 and 60%, respectively. An increase in hydrolytic efficiency was seen in a study by Yan et al. [ 68 ] by using the Cupriavidus basilensis B-8 strain of bacteria in conjunction with diluted acid pretreatment. By forming pores in the biomass and removing the lignin droplets created by the acid treatment, the bacteria increased the surface area available for enzymatic action.

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Work, Cutting, Act, Apple, Liang, Attack, Exo, Fruit, Time, Break, Manner, Milder, Role, Endo, Free, Cotton]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 8 of 26 3.2. Hydrolysis to Release Free Sugars for Fermentation into Ethanol Pretreatment is followed by hydrolysis of the pretreated substrate to saccharify it leading to the release of monomeric sugars. Hydrolysis can be performed by acid or enzymatic treatments 3.2.1. Acid Hydrolysis For a remarkably long time, diverse substrates have been hydrolyzed using acid. The two most frequently used acids are H 2 SO 4 and HCl, which can be utilized in both diluted and concentrated forms and at varied concentrations. Dilute acid hydrolysis involves two processes. The first step in the process is the saccharification of carbohydrates, and if the reaction persists, sugars will then be converted to furfurals. Because cellulose breaks down more slowly than hemicellulose, a two-stage process is necessary to prevent the formation of furfurals from the sugars released from hemicellulose. The first stage of the process recovers the sugars from the hemicellulose under mild conditions, and stage two recovers the sugars from the cellulose under harsher conditions. The effective enzyme from Penicillium consortium and acid hydrolysis of poplar were also compared by Liang et al. [ 69 ], who concluded that the sugar yield from enzymatic hydrolysis is superior 3.2.2. Enzymatic Hydrolysis Since it does not result in the production of inhibitors, enzymatic hydrolysis of the pretreated substrate is preferred to acid hydrolysis. Furthermore, the enzymes contain no secondary reactions and work in a highly precise manner. By pretreating the substrate, cellulose and hemicellulose’s crystalline structure is broken down, allowing the enzymes to attack them and liberate sugars (Figure 5 ). Cellulases and hemicellulases are needed to break down cellulose and hemicellulose, which are the two main carbohydrates found in the cell wall structure [ 70 ]. The pretreated substrate must also include starch and pectin for amylases and pectinases, the corresponding enzymes, to fully saccharify the substrate Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 28 for amylases and pectinases, the corresponding enzymes, to fully saccharify the substrate. Figure 5. Schematic representation of pretreatment of lignocellulosic residue (Modified from [21]). Enzymatic hydrolysis has several benefits, such as high specificity, a higher sugar yield, milder reaction conditions, and a reduced formation of undesirable products [71]. Additionally, enzymatic saccharification offers a more cost-effective, environmentally friendly method for releasing sugars from lignocellulosic biomass Microbial Enzymes Involved in the Hydrolysis of Feedstocks for the Production of Second-Generation Bioethanol Rice straw, wheat straw, corn stover, corn cobs, barley straw, sugarcane bagasse, rice husk, switchgrass, cotton stalks, and poplar biomass, among others, contain 30–48% cellulose and 15–30% hemicellulosic carbohydrates [72]. Cellulases and hemicellulases are thus essential for the efficient saccharification of these residues and the production of free sugars from them. Other agro-industrial residues, such as wheat bran, fruit peels, vegetable waste, rice bran, maize bran, and apple pomace, contain starch and pectin in addition to cellulose and hemicellulose [28,73,74]. As a result, amylases and pectinases are required for the hydrolysis of these biomass residues. Enzyme systems containing cocktails of various hydrolytic enzymes are required for complete and simultaneous hydrolysis of all carbohydrates in various feedstocks for the production of second-generation bioethanol. The following sections discuss the individual enzymes of various systems, along with their modes of action, required for the efficient hydrolysis of various polysaccharides in feedstocks for the generation of second-generation bioethanol. Cellulases The majority of the time, lignocellulosic biomass requires a combination of numerous enzymes, the most crucial of which are cellulases. Cellulases are classified structurally as glycosyl hydrolases, which hydrolyze cellulose’s β -1,4-D-glucan connections to create cellobiose and glucose [75]. To completely dissolve the cellulose framework, three enzymes must act together as depicted in Figure 6 and the role of various enzymes is as follows: Endoglucanase or Endo- β -1,4-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.4) : It makes short-chain oligomers containing non-reducing and reducing tails by randomly cutting the amorphous area of cellulose. Cellobiohydrolase or Exo- β -1,4-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.91): Endoglucanase’s catalytic activity produces non-reducing endings that are hydrolyzed to produce cellobiose, a repetitive unit containing two glucose molecules. Cellobiase or β -glucosidase (BG) (EC 3.2.1.21): To generate monomeric glucose units, it hydrolyzes cellobiose units. Figure 5. Schematic representation of pretreatment of lignocellulosic residue (Modified from [ 21 ]). Enzymatic hydrolysis has several benefits, such as high specificity, a higher sugar yield, milder reaction conditions, and a reduced formation of undesirable products [ 71 ]. Additionally, enzymatic saccharification offers a more cost-effective, environmentally friendly method for releasing sugars from lignocellulosic biomass Microbial Enzymes Involved in the Hydrolysis of Feedstocks for the Production of Second-Generation Bioethanol Rice straw, wheat straw, corn stover, corn cobs, barley straw, sugarcane bagasse, rice husk, switchgrass, cotton stalks, and poplar biomass, among others, contain 30–48% cellulose and 15–30% hemicellulosic carbohydrates [ 72 ]. Cellulases and hemicellulases are thus essential for the efficient saccharification of these residues and the production of free sugars from them. Other agro-industrial residues, such as wheat bran, fruit peels, vegetable waste, rice bran, maize bran, and apple pomace, contain starch and pectin in

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Mode, Six, Niger]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 9 of 26 addition to cellulose and hemicellulose [ 28 , 73 , 74 ]. As a result, amylases and pectinases are required for the hydrolysis of these biomass residues. Enzyme systems containing cocktails of various hydrolytic enzymes are required for complete and simultaneous hydrolysis of all carbohydrates in various feedstocks for the production of second-generation bioethanol The following sections discuss the individual enzymes of various systems, along with their modes of action, required for the efficient hydrolysis of various polysaccharides in feedstocks for the generation of second-generation bioethanol Cellulases The majority of the time, lignocellulosic biomass requires a combination of numerous enzymes, the most crucial of which are cellulases. Cellulases are classified structurally as glycosyl hydrolases, which hydrolyze cellulose’s β -1,4-D-glucan connections to create cellobiose and glucose [ 75 ]. To completely dissolve the cellulose framework, three enzymes must act together as depicted in Figure 6 and the role of various enzymes is as follows: Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 28 Cellulose is the primary growth medium needed by the microbes that make cellulases, while they can also use other carbohydrates. Cellulase-producing microorganisms include fungi such as Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus oryzae, Fusarium oxysporum, Trichoderma viride [60–65]. Figure 6. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of cellulose (Modified from [21]). Hemicellulases The second most abundant polymer in nature is hemicellulose which comprises xylan, mannan, arabinan, and galactan. It is soluble in aqueous alkali but not in water or any chelating agent [76]. The enzyme market for hemicellulases is expanding quickly because these enzymes are used in a variety of industrial processes. The second-most prevalent carbohydrate in lignocellulosic is called xylan, which is a hetero-polysaccharide made up of 1,4- β -D-xylose monomers with different substituents [77]. Figure 7 shows the mode of action of xylanase for the breakdown of xylan [18]. When xylan is hydrolyzed by xylanase, oligosaccharides are produced, which are then hydrolyzed by 1,4- β -xylosidase to produce xylose [78]. For complete hydrolysis of xylans, other enzymes such as ferulic and p-coumaric esterases, xylan esterases, α -4-O-methyl glucoronosidases, and α -1-arabinofuranosidases work in concert [57]. Figure 7. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of xylan (Modified from [18]). In addition to xylanase, mannans , and heteromannanas are additional polysaccharides that are found in the hemicellulose of plant cell walls. D-mannose, a six-carbon Figure 6. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of cellulose (Modified from [ 21 ]). Endoglucanase or Endo- β -1,4-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.4): It makes short-chain oligomers containing non-reducing and reducing tails by randomly cutting the amorphous area of cellulose Cellobiohydrolase or Exo- β -1,4-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.91): Endoglucanase’s catalytic activity produces non-reducing endings that are hydrolyzed to produce cellobiose, a repetitive unit containing two glucose molecules Cellobiase or β -glucosidase (BG) (EC 3.2.1.21): To generate monomeric glucose units, it hydrolyzes cellobiose units Cellulose is the primary growth medium needed by the microbes that make cellulases, while they can also use other carbohydrates. Cellulase-producing microorganisms include fungi such as Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus oryzae, Fusarium oxysporum, Trichoderma viride [ 60 – 65 ]. Hemicellulases The second most abundant polymer in nature is hemicellulose which comprises xylan, mannan, arabinan, and galactan. It is soluble in aqueous alkali but not in water or any chelating agent [ 76 ]. The enzyme market for hemicellulases is expanding quickly because these enzymes are used in a variety of industrial processes. The second-most prevalent carbohydrate in lignocellulosic is called xylan, which is a hetero-polysaccharide made up of 1,4- β -D-xylose monomers with different substituents [ 77 ]. Figure 7 shows the mode

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: New, Links, Filho, Gram, Moreira, Lower, Positive]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 10 of 26 of action of xylanase for the breakdown of xylan [ 18 ]. When xylan is hydrolyzed by xylanase, oligosaccharides are produced, which are then hydrolyzed by 1,4- β -xylosidase to produce xylose [ 78 ]. For complete hydrolysis of xylans, other enzymes such as ferulic and p-coumaric esterases, xylan esterases, α -4-O-methyl glucoronosidases, and α -1- arabinofuranosidases work in concert [ 57 ]. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 28 Cellulose is the primary growth medium needed by the microbes that make cellulases, while they can also use other carbohydrates. Cellulase-producing microorganisms include fungi such as Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus oryzae, Fusarium oxysporum, Trichoderma viride [60–65]. Figure 6. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of cellulose (Modified from [21]). Hemicellulases The second most abundant polymer in nature is hemicellulose which comprises xylan, mannan, arabinan, and galactan. It is soluble in aqueous alkali but not in water or any chelating agent [76]. The enzyme market for hemicellulases is expanding quickly because these enzymes are used in a variety of industrial processes. The second-most prevalent carbohydrate in lignocellulosic is called xylan, which is a hetero-polysaccharide made up of 1,4- β -D-xylose monomers with different substituents [77]. Figure 7 shows the mode of action of xylanase for the breakdown of xylan [18]. When xylan is hydrolyzed by xylanase, oligosaccharides are produced, which are then hydrolyzed by 1,4- β -xylosidase to produce xylose [78]. For complete hydrolysis of xylans, other enzymes such as ferulic and p-coumaric esterases, xylan esterases, α -4-O-methyl glucoronosidases, and α -1-arabinofuranosidases work in concert [57]. Figure 7. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of xylan (Modified from [18]). In addition to xylanase, mannans , and heteromannanas are additional polysaccharides that are found in the hemicellulose of plant cell walls. D-mannose, a six-carbon Figure 7. Mode of action of enzymes involved in the breakdown of xylan (Modified from [ 18 ]). In addition to xylanase, mannans, and heteromannanas are additional polysaccharides that are found in the hemicellulose of plant cell walls. D-mannose, a six-carbon sugar, makes up the majority of mannan, but because plant mannans have a complex and heterogeneous structure, it takes a combination of endo-1,4- β -mannanases, exo-mannosidases, and other enzymes to completely break them down [ 79 ]. These enzymes can also remove the side chain sugars that are present at various locations on mannans. The following enzymes are involved in the hydrolysis of different hemicellulosic structures. Xylan degradation is carried out by three different types of xylanases [ 80 ]. Endo- β -1,4-xylanase (EC 3.2.1.8): By hydrolyzing glycosidic linkages to release linear and branching oligosaccharides, it randomly splits the xylan chain Exo- β -1,4-xylanase or β -1,4-xylan xylohydrolase: It eliminates monomeric xylose units from the xylan polymer’s non-reducing terminus β -1,4-xylosidase or Xylobiase. (EC 3.2.1.37): This enzyme hydrolyzes disaccharides such as xylobiose and the higher xylooligosaccharides that have a lower specific affinity The following enzymes, whose modes of action are also shown in Figure 8 , are considered to be involved in the hydrolysis of mannan and galactomannans by Moreira and Filho [ 81 ]. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 28 sugar, makes up the majority of mannan, but because plant mannans have a complex and heterogeneous structure, it takes a combination of endo-1,4- β -mannanases, exo-mannosidases, and other enzymes to completely break them down [79]. These enzymes can also remove the side chain sugars that are present at various locations on mannans. The following enzymes are involved in the hydrolysis of different hemicellulosic structures. Xylan degradation is carried out by three different types of xylanases [80] Endo- β -1,4-xylanase (EC 3.2.1.8): By hydrolyzing glycosidic linkages to release linear and branching oligosaccharides, it randomly splits the xylan chain Exo- β -1,4-xylanase or β -1,4-xylan xylohydrolase: It eliminates monomeric xylose units from the xylan polymer’s non-reducing terminus. β -1,4-xylosidase or Xylobiase. (EC 3.2.1.37): This enzyme hydrolyzes disaccharides such as xylobiose and the higher xylooligosaccharides that have a lower specific affinity. The following enzymes, whose modes of action are also shown in Figure 8, are considered to be involved in the hydrolysis of mannan and galactomannans by Moreira and Filho [81]. Endo- β -1,4-mannanase (EC 3.2.1.78): It generates new chain endpoints by randomly cleaving the mannan’s β -1,4-linkage internal links. Exo- β -mannosidase (EC 3.2.1.25): It releases mannose sugar moieties by cleaving β -1,4-linked mannosides from the non-reducing ends of mannan and mannooligosaccharides. β -glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21): This enzyme hydrolyzes the 1,4- β -D-glucopyranose found at the non-reducing ends of the oligosaccharides produced from glucomannan and galactoglucomannan. α -galactosidase (EC 3.2.1.22): It is a debranching enzyme that breaks down the α -1,6-linked D-galactopyranosyl side chains of galactomannan and galactoglucomannan. Acetyl mannan esterase: It is a debranching enzyme that causes galactoglucomannan to release its acetyl groups. Figure 8. Schematic representation of O-acetylated galacto-glucomannan and enzymes involved in its degradation and the oligosaccharides released. Agaricus [82], Aspergillus [83,84], Fusarium [84,85], and Trichoderma [86–89] are fungi that have been discovered to break down hemicellulose. Hemicellulases are produced mostly by gram-positive bacteria, such as Bacillus species [90,91] and Clostridia species [92,93]. Among the actinomycetes, some species of Streptomycetes group [94]. Figure 8. Schematic representation of O-acetylated galacto-glucomannan and enzymes involved in its degradation and the oligosaccharides released Endo- β -1,4-mannanase (EC 3.2.1.78): It generates new chain endpoints by randomly cleaving the mannan’s β -1,4-linkage internal links Exo- β -mannosidase (EC 3.2.1.25): It releases mannose sugar moieties by cleaving β - 1,4-linked mannosides from the non-reducing ends of mannan and mannooligosaccharides β -glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21): This enzyme hydrolyzes the 1,4- β -D-glucopyranose found at the non-reducing ends of the oligosaccharides produced from glucomannan and galactoglucomannan.

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Just, Ideal, Pae, Host, End]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 11 of 26 α -galactosidase (EC 3.2.1.22): It is a debranching enzyme that breaks down the α -1,6- linked D-galactopyranosyl side chains of galactomannan and galactoglucomannan Acetyl mannan esterase: It is a debranching enzyme that causes galactoglucomannan to release its acetyl groups Agaricus [ 82 ], Aspergillus [ 83 , 84 ], Fusarium [ 84 , 85 ], and Trichoderma [ 86 – 89 ] are fungi that have been discovered to break down hemicellulose. Hemicellulases are produced mostly by gram-positive bacteria, such as Bacillus species [ 90 , 91 ] and Clostridia species [ 92 , 93 ] Among the actinomycetes, some species of Streptomycetes group [ 94 ]. Pectinases Pectinases are the enzymes that hydrolyze pectic polysaccharides into monomers such as galacturonic acids. Pectin is a major component of plant cell walls, so to completely break down the lignocellulosic biomass, pectinases are required to completely hydrolyze the pectic materials. This lowers the viscosity of the medium and creates an ideal environment for the other enzymes to act on different polysaccharides. The following are the primary enzymes [ 95 ] involved in the hydrolysis of pectic substances: Protopectinases: To liberate soluble form polymerized pectin, they dissolve protopectin. These are divided into two types: type A, which acts with protopectin at the polygalacturonic acid chain area, and type B, which acts with the polysaccharide chains tying the polygalacturonic acid chain to the components of the cell wall Pectin Methyl Esterases (PME) (EC 3.1.1.11): Pectin methyl esterases de-esterify the methyl group of pectin, releasing pectic acid and methanol in the process. Before pectate lyases and polygalacturonases, which require non-esterified substrates, it catalyzes deesterification Pectin Acetyl Esterases (PAE): To liberate pectic acid and acetate, it catalyzes the hydrolysis of the acetyl esters found in pectin Polymethylgalacturonases (PMG): The pectin backbone’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages are broken down, resulting in the formation of 6-methyl-D-galacturonate. It has both endo and exo modes of action. Exo-PMG catalyzes a reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PMG randomly cleaves the substrate Polygalacturonases (PG): To create D-galacturonate, it cleaves the polygalacturonic acid’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages. It can act in both endo and exo modes, just as PMG. Exo-PG (EC 3.2.1.67) catalyzes the reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PG (EC 3.2.1.15) randomly cleaves the substrate Pectate Lyases (PGL): To release α -4,5-D-galacturonate from the glycosidic bonds in polygalacturonic acid, it performs a trans-elimination reaction. Exo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.9) cleaves the substrate at the nonreducing end, whereas endo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.2) operates on the substrate at random Pectin Lyases (PL): It performs trans elimination of glycosidic connections to randomly break the esterified pectin and create unsaturated methyloligogalacturonates Numerous bacteria and fungi that cause plant disease produce pectinolytic enzymes to aid in host invasion. Additionally, they aid in the recycling of carbon ponds in nature by decomposing dead plant materials. Numerous organisms have been shown to generate pectinolytic enzymes, including Aspergillus [ 96 ], Fusarium [ 97 ], Penicillium [ 98 ], Trichoderma [ 99 ], Bacillus , Erwinia , and actinomycetes such as Streptomycetes [ 100 ]. Amylases The three main categories of amylases, also known as glycosyl hydrolases (GH), according to the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (UIBMB), are endo-amylases, exo-amylases, and debranching enzymes. Figure 9 shows how all of these enzymes work to break down starch. The various types of starch-degrading enzymes are as follows [ 101 ].

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Final, Large, Ability, Beta, Link]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 12 of 26 Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 28 Figure 9. Generalized mode of action of amylases. Many fungi, bacteria, and actinomycetes have been found to produce amylases. Several species of the genera Aspergillus and Penicillium are effective fungal amylase producers. Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus , and Aspergillus niger are among the fungi that produce amylases [102–104]. Bacillus species are the most common types of the many bacteria that produce amylases. Rhodothermus, Corynebacterium, Geobacillus, Lactobacillus , and Pseudomonas are some more species. Streptomyces and Thermonospora have been discovered to make amylase among the actinomycetes [105]. Enzyme technology is typically regarded as the most environmentally friendly method of saccharification in any biorefinery. Using additional enzymes to allow for more extensive exploitation of plant biomass could result in processing that uses less energy and chemicals while recovering more fermentable sugar. Table 3 depicts the use of multiple hydrolytic enzymes produced by fungi and bacteria to aid in the process of polysaccharide bioconversions in various biomass residues for the production of second-generation bioethanol. Table 3. Application of various hydrolytic enzymes in the degradation of polysaccharides in various biomass residues. Hydrolytic Enzyme Classification Mode of Action Common Lignocellulosic Biomass References Cellulases Endoglucanase or Endo- β -1,4-glucanase Random hydrolysis of the interior glycosidic bonds in cellulolytic biomass Wheat straw, rice straw, corn cobs, wheat bran, oat bran, Arundo donax, Populus tremuloides, deoiled rice bran, kitchen waste [9,73,75,106] Cellobiohydrolase or Exo- β -1,4-glucanase Hydrolysis of beta-D-glucosidic linkages by releasing mainly cellobiose Cellobiase or β -glucosidase (BG) Cleavage of cellobiose Hemicellulases Endo- β -1,4-xylanase Release of xylose from xylan by Endohydrolysis of (1 → 4)-beta-D-xylosidic link- Wheat bran, kitchen waste, Banana peels, [9,80,81,84,106– 108] Figure 9. Generalized mode of action of amylases Endoamylases or α -amylase (EC 3.2.1.1): It cleaves the α -1,4-bonds present in the inner regions of amylose and amylopectin to break into oligosaccharides and dextrins, decreasing the solution’s viscosity Exoamylase or β -amylase (EC 3.2.1.2): Only the α -1,4-bonds at the non-reducing ends are broken, releasing limit dextrins and β -maltose Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 28 Pectinases Pectinases are the enzymes that hydrolyze pectic polysaccharides into monomers such as galacturonic acids. Pectin is a major component of plant cell walls, so to completely break down the lignocellulosic biomass, pectinases are required to completely hydrolyze the pectic materials. This lowers the viscosity of the medium and creates an ideal environment for the other enzymes to act on different polysaccharides. The following are the primary enzymes [95] involved in the hydrolysis of pectic substances: Protopectinases: To liberate soluble form polymerized pectin, they dissolve protopectin. These are divided into two types: type A, which acts with protopectin at the polygalacturonic acid chain area, and type B, which acts with the polysaccharide chains tying the polygalacturonic acid chain to the components of the cell wall. Pectin Methyl Esterases (PME) (EC 3.1.1.11): Pectin methyl esterases de-esterify the methyl group of pectin, releasing pectic acid and methanol in the process. Before pectate lyases and polygalacturonases, which require non-esterified substrates, it catalyzes de-esterification. Pectin Acetyl Esterases (PAE): To liberate pectic acid and acetate, it catalyzes the hydrolysis of the acetyl esters found in pectin. Polymethylgalacturonases (PMG): The pectin backbone’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages are broken down, resulting in the formation of 6-methyl-D-galacturonate. It has both endo and exo modes of action. Exo-PMG catalyzes a reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PMG randomly cleaves the substrate. Polygalacturonases (PG): To create D-galacturonate, it cleaves the polygalacturonic acid’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages. It can act in both endo and exo modes, just as PMG. Exo-PG (EC 3.2.1.67) catalyzes the reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PG (EC 3.2.1.15) randomly cleaves the substrate Pectate Lyases (PGL): To release α -4,5-D-galacturonate from the glycosidic bonds in polygalacturonic acid, it performs a trans-elimination reaction. Exo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.9) cleaves the substrate at the nonreducing end, whereas endo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.2) operates on the substrate at random Pectin Lyases (PL): It performs trans elimination of glycosidic connections to randomly break the esterified pectin and create unsaturated methyloligogalacturonates. Numerous bacteria and fungi that cause plant disease produce pectinolytic enzymes to aid in host invasion. Additionally, they aid in the recycling of carbon ponds in nature by decomposing dead plant materials. Numerous organisms have been shown to generate pectinolytic enzymes, including Aspergillus [96], Fusarium [97], Penicillium [98], Trichoderma [99], Bacillus , Erwinia , and actinomycetes such as Streptomycetes [100] Amylases The three main categories of amylases, also known as glycosyl hydrolases (GH), according to the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (UIBMB), are endo-amylases, exo-amylases, and debranching enzymes. Figure 9 shows how all of these enzymes work to break down starch. The various types of starch-degrading enzymes are as follows [101]. Endoamylases or α -amylase (EC 3.2.1.1): It cleaves the α -1,4-bonds present in the inner regions of amylose and amylopectin to break into oligosaccharides and dextrins, decreasing the solution’s viscosity Exoamylase or β -amylase (EC 3.2.1.2): Only the α -1,4-bonds at the non-reducing ends are broken, releasing limit dextrins and β -maltose. ƴ - mylase or Amyloglucosidase or Glucoamylase (EC 3.2.1.3): It functions as a debranching enzyme by cleaving the final α -1,4 links at the non-reducing end of amylase and amylopectin, which releases glucose. -amylase or Amyloglucosidase or Glucoamylase (EC 3.2.1.3): It functions as a debranching enzyme by cleaving the final α -1,4 links at the non-reducing end of amylase and amylopectin, which releases glucose Many fungi, bacteria, and actinomycetes have been found to produce amylases. Several species of the genera Aspergillus and Penicillium are effective fungal amylase producers Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus , and Aspergillus niger are among the fungi that produce amylases [ 102 – 104 ]. Bacillus species are the most common types of the many bacteria that produce amylases Rhodothermus, Corynebacterium, Geobacillus, Lactobacillus , and Pseudomonas are some more species Streptomyces and Thermonospora have been discovered to make amylase among the actinomycetes [ 105 ]. Enzyme technology is typically regarded as the most environmentally friendly method of saccharification in any biorefinery. Using additional enzymes to allow for more extensive exploitation of plant biomass could result in processing that uses less energy and chemicals while recovering more fermentable sugar. Table 3 depicts the use of multiple hydrolytic enzymes produced by fungi and bacteria to aid in the process of polysaccharide bioconversions in various biomass residues for the production of second-generation bioethanol To completely hydrolyze biomass residues and produce second-generation bioethanol, a large number of enzymes are required. These enzymes are required for hydrolyzing a specific linkage at a specific phase in any biorefinery. Furthermore, the method of action provides any biorefinery with critical information for overcoming any flaws in the hydrolysis of any type of sugar or linkage between them. A microorganism with the ability to release a variety of enzymes involved in the hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass could be a candidate for use in a biorefinery producing second-generation biofuel.

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Grain, Flour, Mango, Brewer, Cake, Black, Orange, Mill, Peel]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 13 of 26 Table 3. Application of various hydrolytic enzymes in the degradation of polysaccharides in various biomass residues Hydrolytic Enzyme Classification Mode of Action Common Lignocellulosic Biomass References Cellulases Endoglucanase or Endo- β -1,4-glucanase Random hydrolysis of the interior glycosidic bonds in cellulolytic biomass Wheat straw, rice straw, corn cobs, wheat bran, oat bran, Arundo donax, Populus tremuloides, deoiled rice bran, kitchen waste [ 9 , 73 , 75 , 106 ] Cellobiohydrolase or Exo- β -1,4-glucanase Hydrolysis of beta-D-glucosidic linkages by releasing mainly cellobiose Cellobiase or β -glucosidase (BG) Cleavage of cellobiose Hemicellulases Endo- β -1,4-xylanase Release of xylose from xylan by Endohydrolysis of (1 → 4)-beta-D-xylosidic linkages Wheat bran, kitchen waste, Banana peels, Peanut oil cake, Brewer’s spent grain [ 9 , 80 , 81 , 84 , 106 – 108 ] Exo- β -1,4-xylanase or β -1,4-xylan xylohydrolase Release monomeric xylose from the non-reducing end of xylan β -1,4-xylosidase or Xylobiase hydrolyzes disaccharides such as xylobiose and the higher xylooligosaccharides Endo- β -1,4-mannanase Randomly cleaving the mannan’s β -1,4-linkage internal links Exo- β -mannosidase Releases mannose sugar moieties by cleaving β -1,4-linked mannosides from the non-reducing ends of mannan β -glucosidase Hydrolyzes the 1,4- β -D-glucopyranose found at the non-reducing ends of the oligosaccharides α -galactosidase breaks down the α -1,6-linked D-galactopyranosyl side chains of the oligosaccharides Acetyl mannan esterase The debranching enzyme releases acetyl groups Pectinases Protopectinases Liberate soluble form polymerized pectin Wheat bran, mango peel, banana peel, kitchen waste, Orange peels, exhausted sugar beet cassettes [ 84 , 85 , 109 , 110 ] Pectin Methyl Esterases Deesterify the methyl group of pectin, releasing pectic acid and methanol Pectin Acetyl Esterases Hydrolysis of the acetyl esters found in pectin Polymethylgalacturonases Breaks α -1,4-glycosidic linkages in pectin Polygalacturonases Cleaves the polygalacturonic acid’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages Pectate Lyases Release α -4,5-D-galacturonate from the glycosidic bonds in polygalacturonic acid Pectin Lyases randomly break the esterified pectin and create unsaturated methyloligogalacturonates Amylase Endoamylases or α -amylase Cleaves the α -1,4-bonds present in the inner regions of amylose and amylopectin Rice bran, wheat bran, black gram bran, Soybean husk, flour mill waste [ 101 , 105 , 111 ] Exoamylase or β -amylase Release limit dextrins and β -maltose Sustainability 2023 , 15 , x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 28 Pectinases Pectinases are the enzymes that hydrolyze pectic polysaccharides into monomers such as galacturonic acids. Pectin is a major component of plant cell walls, so to completely break down the lignocellulosic biomass, pectinases are required to completely hydrolyze the pectic materials. This lowers the viscosity of the medium and creates an ideal environment for the other enzymes to act on different polysaccharides. The following are the primary enzymes [95] involved in the hydrolysis of pectic substances: Protopectinases: To liberate soluble form polymerized pectin, they dissolve protopectin. These are divided into two types: type A, which acts with protopectin at the polygalacturonic acid chain area, and type B, which acts with the polysaccharide chains tying the polygalacturonic acid chain to the components of the cell wall. Pectin Methyl Esterases (PME) (EC 3.1.1.11): Pectin methyl esterases de-esterify the methyl group of pectin, releasing pectic acid and methanol in the process. Before pectate lyases and polygalacturonases, which require non-esterified substrates, it catalyzes de-esterification. Pectin Acetyl Esterases (PAE): To liberate pectic acid and acetate, it catalyzes the hydrolysis of the acetyl esters found in pectin. Polymethylgalacturonases (PMG): The pectin backbone’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages are broken down, resulting in the formation of 6-methyl-D-galacturonate. It has both endo and exo modes of action. Exo-PMG catalyzes a reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PMG randomly cleaves the substrate. Polygalacturonases (PG): To create D-galacturonate, it cleaves the polygalacturonic acid’s α -1,4-glycosidic linkages. It can act in both endo and exo modes, just as PMG. Exo-PG (EC 3.2.1.67) catalyzes the reaction at the non-reducing end of the substrate while endo-PG (EC 3.2.1.15) randomly cleaves the substrate Pectate Lyases (PGL): To release α -4,5-D-galacturonate from the glycosidic bonds in polygalacturonic acid, it performs a trans-elimination reaction. Exo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.9) cleaves the substrate at the nonreducing end, whereas endo-PGL (EC 4.2.2.2) operates on the substrate at random Pectin Lyases (PL): It performs trans elimination of glycosidic connections to randomly break the esterified pectin and create unsaturated methyloligogalacturonates. Numerous bacteria and fungi that cause plant disease produce pectinolytic enzymes to aid in host invasion. Additionally, they aid in the recycling of carbon ponds in nature by decomposing dead plant materials. Numerous organisms have been shown to generate pectinolytic enzymes, including Aspergillus [96], Fusarium [97], Penicillium [98], Trichoderma [99], Bacillus , Erwinia , and actinomycetes such as Streptomycetes [100] Amylases The three main categories of amylases, also known as glycosyl hydrolases (GH), according to the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (UIBMB), are endo-amylases, exo-amylases, and debranching enzymes. Figure 9 shows how all of these enzymes work to break down starch. The various types of starch-degrading enzymes are as follows [101]. Endoamylases or α -amylase (EC 3.2.1.1): It cleaves the α -1,4-bonds present in the inner regions of amylose and amylopectin to break into oligosaccharides and dextrins, decreasing the solution’s viscosity Exoamylase or β -amylase (EC 3.2.1.2): Only the α -1,4-bonds at the non-reducing ends are broken, releasing limit dextrins and β -maltose. ƴ - mylase or Amyloglucosidase or Glucoamylase (EC 3.2.1.3): It functions as a debranching enzyme by cleaving the final α -1,4 links at the non-reducing end of amylase and amylopectin, which releases glucose. -amylase or Amyloglucosidase or Glucoamylase Debranching enzyme releases glucose

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Key, Kaur, Lack, State, Chugh, Ssf, Leite]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 14 of 26 4. Production of Microbial Enzymes for Use in the Generation of Second-Generation Bioethanol Two different fermentation procedures can be used to produce enzymes at the industrial level while taking production costs and using natural substrates into account. There are two types of fermentation: liquid-state fermentation and solid-state fermentation 4.1. Solid-State Fermentation (SSF) For the growth of microorganisms, this type of fermentation often uses a moist solid substrate. SSF is a fermentation procedure that uses either a natural or inert solid substrate in the absence of freely flowing water [ 112 , 113 ]. A key component of SSF is the choice of solid material, which must be insoluble and serve as both a physical support and a source of nutrition for the bacteria. This imitates their natural environment and promotes the synthesis of enzymes and other useful metabolites for industry [ 114 , 115 ]. Due to the utilization of lignocellulosic as a medium or substrate for the development of microorganisms to create cellulases, hemicellulases, pectinases, and amylases, this fermentation is cost-effective. SSF cultures were discovered to produce more enzymes as compared to liquid cultures. SSF might be viewed as a superior method for the industrial synthesis of enzymes while taking into account production costs and employing natural substrates. Higher fermentation productivities, higher product stability, higher product concentration, decreased chances of contamination due to lower water activity need, and development of microorganisms specialized for water-insoluble substrates are all benefits of SSF [ 116 ]. Other benefits include the use of straightforward instrumentation, compactness of the fermenter due to a smaller volume of water, lack of foam formation, higher fermentation capacity, decreased catabolic repression, cost-effectiveness, and a reduced need for solvents in the product recovery process [ 117 , 118 ]. Various researchers have used different lignocellulosic, agro-industrial, and biodegradable municipal solid waste feedstocks to produce various hydrolytic enzyme systems important in the industries working in the field of second-generation biofuels using bacterial and fungal cultures. In an attempt to investigate the potential of Aspergillus niger CECT 2088 on brewer’s spent grain for the production of cellulases and xylanases, Leite et al. [ 108 ] used brewer’s spent grain. Kaur et al. [ 119 ] used a natural variant of Aspergillus niger P-19 to produce a cellulase-hemicellulase consortium on rice straw for efficient and low-cost saccharification, whereas Chugh et al. [ 9 ] produced multiple carbohydrases including cellulases, hemicellulases, pectinases, and amylases through solid-state fermentation of de-oiled rice bran. Recently, our group developed an enzyme cocktail comprised of 19 hydrolytic enzymes for the generation of bioethanol from various lignocellulosic and agro-industrial waste biomass residues in solid, surface, and submerged state fermentation using a standardized kitchen waste-based medium [ 120 ]. More studies on optimizing various physical and cultural factors, as well as enzyme characterization, have been published in the literature to achieve the highest enzyme productivity and activity. Table 4 compiles some examples of solid-state fermentations for the production of various hydrolytic enzymes important in second-generation biofuels with significant breakthroughs Table 4. Examples of the production of hydrolytic enzyme systems by solid-state fermentations using various substrates and breakthroughs Substrate Microorganism Enzymes Major Breakthrough References Wheat straw, rice straw, corn cobs, wheat bran, oat bran, Arundo donax, Populus tremuloides Thermoascus aurantiacus Cellulases Thermostable cellulolytic components production [ 121 ] Wheat bran Aspergillus awamori Nakazawa (MTCC 6652) Glucoamylase Optimization of extraction and purification of glucoamylase [ 122 ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Single, Paddy, Pine, Multi, Coffee, Alpha, Lyase]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 15 of 26 Table 4. Cont Substrate Microorganism Enzymes Major Breakthrough References Wheat bran Aspergillus niger NS-2 Cellulases xylanase, mannanase, pectinase, amylases Co-production of multiple enzymes for Bioethanol Production [ 123 ] Deoiled rice bran Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus oryzae, Trichoderma reesei Cellulase, amylase Co-production of the thermostable multi-enzyme system for ethanol production [ 9 , 124 ] Kitchen waste Aspergillus niger CJ-5 Cellulases, xylanase, mannanase, pectinase, amylases Co-production of multiple enzymes for Bioethanol Production from kitchen waste residues [ 73 ] Brewer’s spent grain Fusarium oxysporum SS-25 Cellulases Production of cellulases for the production of ethanol from brewer’s spent grain [ 125 ] wheat straw, paddy straw, sugarcane waste, maize straw Bacillus licheniformis α -amylase Production of amylase from the mixture of agricultural residue waste [ 126 ] Rice bran, wheat bran, black gram bran Achromobacter xylosoxidans Amylase, cellulase, xylanase Co-production of multiple enzymes from various agro waste [ 127 ] Peanut oil cake Aspergillus oryzae Cellulase, xylanase, amylase Enhancement in various functional properties during fermentation in addition to enzyme activities [ 107 ] Brewer’s spent grain Aspergillus niger CECT 2088 Cellulase, xylanase Simultaneous production of lignocellulolytic enzymes [ 108 ] Orange peel, apple pomace, and rice fiber Compost from Municipal Solid Waste as inoculum Cellulases Development of a framework for a zero-waste enzyme production process [ 128 ] Coffee husk and wood chips Compost from MSW as inoculum Cellulases Enhanced cellulase production [ 129 ] Orange peels and exhausted sugar beet cassettes Aspergillus awamori 2 B.361 U 2/1 Cellulase, xylanase, pectinase Enhanced sugar production [ 109 ] Sugarcane bagasse Penicillium sp., Rhizomucor sp., Trichoderma sp Cellulases Use of sugarcane bagasse as an inducer for cellulase [ 130 ] Grape pomace with wheat bran Aspergillus niger 3 T 5 B 8 Cellulase, xylanase Production of a cocktail of hydrolytic enzymes using Grape pomace with wheat bran [ 131 ] Wheat bran, banana peel, orange peel, rice bran, pine apple peel Bacillus subtilis D 19 Amylase Enhanced amylase production on various agro-waste residues [ 132 ] Mango peels Aspergillus tamarii Pectinase Enhanced polygalacturonase and pectin lyase [ 110 ] Wheat chaff Trichoderma reesei QM 9414 Cellulases and xylanase Simultaneous production of cellulase and xylanase [ 133 ] Rice straw Aspergillus niger P-19 Cellulases, hemicellulases Enhanced sugars and ethanol from rice straw [ 119 ] Rice straw Penicillium spp Cellulase Potent cellulase cocktail production for lignocellulosic degradation [ 69 ] Soybean husk and flour mill waste Aspergillus oryzae Amylase Production and purification of alpha-amylase [ 111 ] Wheat bran Bacillus sp. TC-DT 13 Xylanase Optimized production of extracellular xylanase [ 134 ] Wheat bran Trichoderma reesei , Neurospora crassa Cellulases Optimization and standardization of various factors for cellulase production [ 24 ] Banana peels Aspergillus fumigatus Pectinase and xylanase Coproduction of pectinase and xylanase [ 84 ] Kitchen waste Aspergillus niger S-30 Cellulases, Hemicellulases, Pectinases, Amylases 19 hydrolytic enzymes from a single substrate and organism [ 120 ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Creation, Shell, Irfan, Shear, Cob, Bio, Grade, Fixed, Culture, Offer, Case, Elegbede]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 16 of 26 4.2. Liquid State Fermentation (Submerged and Surface) Under stationary or shaking circumstances, liquid-state fermentation involves the development of microorganisms in a liquid medium that contains the necessary nutrients This type of fermentation is appealing for the development of microbes and the creation of products with added value due to several factors, including (a) homogenous distribution of nutrients for the proliferation of microorganisms; (b) simplicity of monitoring of variables such as moisture, temperature, pH, agitation, oxygen, and nutrient levels; (c) powerful technology that has already been best adapted with automatic grade and equipment availability. Cellulolytic enzymes, ligninolytic enzymes, and other beneficial metabolites can all be produced through liquid-state fermentation [ 135 ]. Liquid-state fermentation is divided into submerged and surface culture fermentation depending primarily on whether the incubation is being carried out in stationary or rocking circumstances. In surface culture, fermentation microorganisms develop on the shallow nutritional media’s surface, consume the nutrients necessary for their growth, and simultaneously release products into the medium. Since fungi are filamentous in nature and agitation might break their mycelia, segregating biomass from the liquid medium, this mode of fermentation does not call for agitation in the case of fungi [ 136 ]. However, surface culture fermentation has a lower bio-reaction rate and longer fermentation periods as compared to submerged fermentation, which involves robust aeration and agitation [ 137 ]. Submerged fermentation is preferred over surface culture fermentation as a result of this drawback. Through submerged cultivation, many strains of bacteria, yeast, fungus, and algae have been employed for fermentation. These methods of fermentation can use either synthetically manufactured or lignocellulosic biomass-produced fermentation media The fungal hyphae are not desiccated as a result of the continual immersion in a liquid medium during liquid-state fermentation, which is also the most effective, easiest to sterilize, and most cost-effective approach for producing bioagents in large quantities [ 138 ]. Except for high-density cultures, microorganisms are exposed to a fixed temperature throughout their life cycle. Additionally, oxygen availability to biomass can be regulated at a specific level of medium saturation. When compared to solid substrates, submerged culture has various benefits, including easier control of fermentation parameters such as pH and temperature, improved contamination control, and a lower labor and space demand. The nature and amplitude of forces in a bioreactor are studied using fermenters that offer the organism a low-shear environment. Surface culture fermentation is preferred to submerged fermentation for several reasons, including equipment expense, energy usage, aeration breakdown, improved productivity, and yield [ 139 ]. Elegbede et al. [ 140 ] synthesized in-house xylanases in submerged fermentation conditions using corn cob as the substrate. Irfan et al. [ 141 ] used a peanut shell to produce cellulases in a submerged fermentation process. Recent studies investigated the muchneeded potential of the submerged fermentation process in the production of various hydrolytic enzymes involved in the production of second-generation biofuels. Table 5 depicts a few examples of liquid-state fermentation producing hydrolytic enzymes on various substrates, as well as a significant breakthrough in their production.

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Date, Pineapple, Pear, Tree, Box]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 17 of 26 Table 5. Examples of the production of hydrolytic enzyme systems by liquid-state fermentations using various substrates and breakthroughs Substrate Microorganism Enzymes Major Breakthrough References Rice bran Aspergillus niger Pectinase Enhanced Polygalacturonase and Pectinmethylesterase activity [ 142 ] Solka-Floc cellulose Penicillium brasilianum IBT 20888 Cellulases, xylanase Coinduction of cellulolytic and xylanolytic [ 143 ] Mandarin peels and tree leaves Pleurotus dryinus Cellulases, xylanase, laccase, manganese peroxidase Enhanced activity of cellulases, xylanase, laccase, manganese peroxidase [ 144 ] Starch Bacillus sp Amylase Optimization of enhanced amylase production [ 145 ] Partially delignified cellulignin Trichoderma harzianum IOC-4038 Cellulases Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation process development using partially delignified cellulignin [ 146 ] Sugarcane bagasse, corn stover Acremonium sp Cellulases, xylanase Enhanced reducing sugar conversion [ 147 ] Wheat bran Aspergillus tamarii MTCC 5152 Amylase Production of a cellulase-free and alkali-stable xylanase [ 148 ] Corn cob Aspergillus fumigatus SD 5 A xylanase Use of eight fungal strains in xylanase production [ 140 ] Pineapple stem Bacillus subtilis BKDS 1 Pectinase Economical production of the enzyme, pectinase using pineapple stem extract (PSE) medium [ 149 ] Coffee waste Penicillium humicola Mannanase Statistical experimental designs to enhance the β -mannanase production [ 150 ] Wheat bran and citrus peel waste Bacillus pumilus Xylanase and pectinase Maximum production of xylanase and pectinase in a short submerged fermentation cycle [ 151 ] Banana peels Bacillus subtilis TYg 4-3 and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SW 106 Pectinase Optimization of bacterial pectinsae [ 152 ] Coffee residue powder, date seeds powder, prickly pear seeds Bacillus subtilis US 191 Mannanase Statistical experimental designs to enhance the bacterial β -mannanase production [ 90 ] Peanut shells Bacillus paralichniformis Cellulases Utilization of peanut shells for cellulase production through Box-Behnken Design [ 141 ] Wheat chaff Trichoderma reesei QM 9414 Cellulases and xylanase Simultaneous production of cellulase and xylanase [ 133 ] Wheat bran, rice husk Aspergillus niger Amylase Production and purification of amylase using an aqueous two-phase system [ 153 ] Corn stover Phanerochaete chrysosporium PC 2 Cellulases and hemicellulases Revealed the importance of carbohydrate-binding module in the hydrolysis process of lignocellulose [ 154 ] Corn bran Aspergillus niger Xylanase Use of UVrays for enhanced xylanase [ 155 ] Wheat bran and citrus peel waste Bacillus safensis M 35, Bacillus altitudinis J 208 Xylanase and pectinase Concentration values for wheat bran and citrus peel substrates are to be amended in one single production medium for enhanced xylanase and pectinase [ 156 ] Banana peels Aspergillus fumigatus Pectinase and xylanase Coproduction of pectinase and xylanase [ 84 ] Kitchen waste Aspergillus niger S-30 Cellulases, Hemicellulases, Pectinases, Amylases 19 hydrolytic enzymes from a single substrate and organism [ 120 ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Da Silva, Silva, Purchase, Tool, Fed, Zhu, Coli, Candida, Roberto, Batch, Chen, Able, Boost]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 18 of 26 Enzymatic saccharification of lignocellulosic feedstock is followed by fermentation of the hydrolysate by suitable fermentative microorganisms for ethanol production. The hydrolysate produced by enzymes after saccharification of pretreated lignocellulosic feedstock contains a mixture of hexoses and pentoses, including glucose, mannose, xylose, arabinose, galactose, and some oligosaccharides Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Pachysolen tannophilus, Escherichia coli, Zymomonas mobilis, Candida brassicae, Candida shehatae, Bacillus macerans, Clostridium sp., etc. are used to ferment these monomeric sugars to produce ethanol [ 157 , 158 ]. However, for an effective ethanol production method, the fermentative microorganism should be able to use a wide range of substrates, including pentoses and hexoses, and have high ethanol productivities, tolerance for high ethanol concentrations and inhibitors present in the hydrolysate [ 159 , 160 ]. So far, four types of fermentation have been studied: (i) separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF), (ii) simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF), (iii) simultaneous saccharification and co-fermentation (SSCF), and (iv) Consolidated bioprocessing (CBP), and the key features of each are summarised in Table 6 . Table 6. Salient features of various types of fermentation technology involved in second-generation bioethanol production Fermentation Technology Steps Involved Advantages Disadvantages Reference Separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF) 1 Pretreatment 2 Saccharification 3 Fermentation The conditions can be optimized separately for each step End product inhibitionRequire separate reactors for each step High energy and time consumption [ 161 ] Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) 1 Pretreatment 2 Saccharification and Fermentation • Elimination of end-product inhibition • Removes the need for separate reactors • Cost-effective • Reduction in time Differences in the optimum condition for hydrolytic enzymes and fermenting microorganisms [ 162 ] Simultaneous Saccharification and Co-Fermentation (SSCF) 1 Pretreatment 2 Saccharification and Co-Fermentation • Saccharification of both hexose and pentose sugars • High sugar and ethanol yield Differences in the optimum condition for hydrolytic enzymes and fermenting microorganisms [ 163 ] Consolidated Bio-Processing (CBP) Pretreatment, enzyme production, Saccharification, and Fermentation • All the steps are carried out in a single reactor • Elimination of cost involved in the purchase or production of enzymes Differences in the optimal conditions for enzymes or microorganisms involved in the process [ 164 ] Many reports from around the world suggested that the use of enzymes in the conversion of lignocellulosic and other waste biomass residues to second-generation bioethanol provides a much-needed boost to this sector. Roberto et al. [ 162 ] reported SSF using a vertical ball mill reactor with a high loading of rice straw. The study concluded that feeding the substrate gradually at an initial load of 16% with 4% additions after 10 and 24 h using an inoculum level of 3 g/L resulted in a high ethanol concentration of 52.3 g/L. As a result, the findings demonstrated that a suitable fed-batch feeding strategy of biomass aids in overcoming the limitations of SSF in batch mode. Zhu et al. [ 163 ] used SSCF to ferment ethylenediamine-treated corn stover with Saccharomyces cerevisiae and xylose utilizing yeast, yielding 59.8 g/L ethanol at 42 ◦ C. In a study by da Silva et al. [ 165 ], pretreatment used alkaline hydrogen peroxide, which efficiently removed lignin and hemicellulose from carnauba waste, yielding 57.49% and 56.13%, respectively. Chen et al. [ 166 ] obtained 72.3% ethanol yield on total sugar by co-fermenting with S. cerevisiae IPE 005 in corn stover hydrolysate. In another study, using a statistical approach significantly increased sugar yields and the tool

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Thailand, Human, Local, Belgium, Planet, Ahead, Denmark, Austria, Simple, Back, November, France, Farmer, Russia, Pre]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 19 of 26 was successful in designing simple conditions of pre-treatment and hydrolysis of deoiled rice bran for maximum saccharification of all carbohydrates present in the substrate [ 9 ]. Recently, our group investigated the potential of biodegradable solid waste, primarily kitchen waste, as a feedstock for the production of second-generation biofuel. A multiple hydrolytic enzyme cocktail was created using 19 concentrated enzyme components with an enzymatic yield of 150–250 IU/mL of CMCase. 30–40 IU/mL of FPase, 25–35 IU/mL of Avicelase, 30–40 IU/mL of β -glucosidase, 135–145 IU/mL of cellobiase, 160–175 IU/mL of salicinase, 800–900 IU/mL of xylanase, 50–70 IU/mL of xylosidase, 260–275 IU/mL of mannanase, 25–35 IU/mL of mannosidase, 25–35 IU/mL of pectin-lyase, 25–35 IU/mL of polygalacturonase, 12,500–15,000 U/mL of α -amylase, 50–75 IU/mL of pullulanase, 400–500 IU/mL of glucoamylase, 140–165 IU/mL of α -glucosidase, 2100–2300 U/mL of protease, 190–210 U/mL of lipase and 190–210 U/mL of alginate lyase [ 120 ]. This breakthrough has paved the way for biodegradable solid waste to be used as a substrate for enzymes in second-generation biofuels Different countries use different feedstocks for bioethanol production based on regional availability, local climate, and economic drivers. Sugars and starches are the primary feedstocks for commercial bioethanol production. The ethanol produced in the United States and Brazil accounts for 85% of all bioethanol produced globally [ 167 ]. The United States, the world’s largest bioethanol producer, primarily uses corn as a feedstock, which is also used in China and Slovakia whereas Brazil, the world’s second-largest bioethanol producer, primarily uses sugarcane juice and molasses as a feedstock which are also employed in India, Indonesia, Brazil, China, Thailand, and Colombia. Wheat is generally used in Denmark, Austria, Germany, Canada, Belgium, France, and Russia [ 75 ]. Because most of these feedstocks compete with human feed, lignocellulosic biomass, as well as agro-industrial and biodegradable municipal solid waste residues, which are abundant and the most untapped natural reservoir on the planet, are promising feedstocks for second-generation bioethanol generation 5. Conclusions and Future Outlook The world’s increasing energy requirements as a result of urbanization, excessive use of fossil fuels, and the issue of disposing of agricultural waste residues are all scenarios that make the use of biofuels made from waste biomass an essential solution that can solve all of these problems. Second-generation ethanol production is significantly more expensive than first-generation ethanol, which uses existing technology for converting biomass to bioethanol, and it is difficult to predict when its cost will approach that of corn/sugarcane ethanol. Cellulosic ethanol’s superior environmental benefits require drastic cost reductions at all levels. The cost of pretreatment, enzymes for hydrolysis, fermentation of all sugars, and distillation, all significantly increase the final cost of producing cellulosic ethanol. Many countries around the world have launched Ethanol Blending Programmes to reduce their reliance on crude oil imports, reduce carbon emissions, and increase farmer income. Because of the coordinated efforts of the Public Sector Oil Marketing Companies, the program’s target of 10% blending has been met much ahead of the November 2022 deadline in India. The Government of India announced its ‘National Policy on Biofuels’ in 2018, with an indicative target of 20% ethanol blending in gasoline by 2030. However, given the encouraging performance and various interventions implemented by the government since 2014, the target of 20% ethanol blending has been pushed back from 2030 to 2025–26. In this context cellulosic ethanol and enzyme systems especially cellulases and hemicellulases are emerging as the stronger contenders to increase the indigenous production of secondgeneration bioethanol. Globally, research at all levels is currently being conducted to reduce the overall cost of the process. Furthermore, government-level incentives for secondgeneration ethanol and mandated ethanol blending into gasoline in several countries may pave the way for future bioethanol production from waste biomass The scientific community has switched to biofuels that are made from a variety of biomass residues, including municipal and agricultural waste, as a result of the rising cost of

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Lee, Board, Qian, Gas, Lion, Dose, Read, Qiao, Paris, Tokyo, Pereira, Subramaniam, Original, Data, Portugal, Mater, Prod, Zhou, Azimi, Tian, Leahy, Author, Bank, March, Yang, Springer, Xue]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 20 of 26 fossil fuels, the global warming caused by the careless use of these fuels, and the unscientific disposal of agricultural and agro-industrial waste residues. The commercial manufacture of bioethanol, which is now the highest-volume industrial fermentation product, generally uses sweet and starchy substrates. However, specialists are careful about their utilization due to the utility of such starchy residues as human nourishment. Even yet, many nations have established limitations on their permissible usage. Scientists are working to use agricultural, agroindustrial, and municipal solid waste as second-generation bioethanol feedstocks as the biofuel industry develops as a result of the rise in ethanol demand These feedstocks are used by a small number of companies that pretreat and hydrolyze materials using chemical processes, which results in increased costs and significant chemical loading that eventually enters our life and environment. Enzymatic hydrolysis is advised, even though it adds between 30 and 50% to the overall cost of producing ethanol from lignocellulosic wastes. Enzymes with higher substrate specificity, lower dose requirements, and improved cost-effectiveness are required. The process economy as a whole can gain from the creation of innovative enzymes that can hydrolyze a variety of substrates, high-titer production of such enzymes, further development using genetic and molecular methods, and lower costs associated with the enzyme production process. Technologies that reuse the enzyme that washed away during hydrolysis can help address the issue of enzyme cost. The development of effective and environmentally friendly process technology for converting lignocellulosic residues to bioethanol may be made possible by advancements in enzyme technology and commercialization. This technology may prove to be a panacea for pressing global issues such as the depletion of fossil fuels and the improper disposal of these priceless resources Author Contributions: S.K.S.: Conceptualization, writing—review and editing, supervision; A.S.: investigation, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing; R.S.: investigation, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript Funding: This research received no external funding Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable Data Availability Statement: Not applicable Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest References 1 World Bank. Urban Population (% of Total). Available online: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS. (accessed on 15 January 2019) 2 Leahy, S. City Emits 60% More Carbon than Thought National Geographic , 6 March 2018. Available online: https://www. nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/03/city-consumption-greenhouse-gases-carbon-c 40-spd/ (accessed on 16 November 2022) 3 Qiao, W.; Lu, H.; Zhou, G.; Azimi, M.; Yang, Q.; Tian, W. A hybrid algorithm for carbon dioxide emissions forecasting based on improved lion swarm optimizer J. Clean. Prod 2020 , 244 , 118612. [ CrossRef ] 4 Hanaki, K.; Portugal-Pereira, J. The effect of biofuel production on greenhouse gas emission reductions. In Biofuels and Sustainability ; Springer: Tokyo, Japan, 2018; pp. 53–71 5 Moukamnerd, C.; Kawahara, H.; Katakura, Y. Feasibility study of ethanol production from food wastes by consolidated continuous solid-state fermentation J. Sustain. Bioenerg. Syst 2013 , 3 , 143–148. [ CrossRef ] 6 Qian, X.; Xue, J.; Yang, Y.; Lee, S.W. Thermal properties and combustion-related problems prediction of agricultural crop residues Energies 2021 , 14 , 4619. [ CrossRef ] 7 Subramaniam, Y.; Masron, T.A. The impact of economic globalization on biofuel in developing countries Energy Convers. Manag 2021 , 1 , 100064. [ CrossRef ] 8 IEA Bioenergy ; IEA: Paris, France, 2022; Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/bioenergy (accessed on 14 November 2022) 9 Chugh, P.; Kaur, J.; Soni, R.; Sharma, A.; Soni, S.K. A low-cost process for efficient hydrolysis of deoiled rice bran and ethanol production using an inhouse produced multi-enzyme preparation from Aspergillus niger P-19 J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag 2022 , 25 , 359–375. [ CrossRef ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: De La Cruz, Dos Santos, La Cruz, De Aquino, Perez Luna, De Oliveira, Eng, Zhang, Liu, Gomes, Ziolkowska, Fruits, Ahmed, Mohamed, Lay, Santos, Press, Cambridge, Isabel, Khan, Hadi, Mina, Song, Trinidad, Aggarwal, Singh, Devadas, Ram, Xie, Prajapati, Sindhu, Zamora, Pez, Yadav, Aquino, Ocampo, Gaur, Zhao, Priya, Moreno, Wang, Chew, Jalal, Int, Aguilar, Arun, Valor, Wani, Phang, Sci, Rojas, Babu, Saini, Boca, Chem, Berlin, Siddiqui, Show, Perez, Carvajal, Kou, Dairy, Pod, Rez, Gonz, Part, Akbar, Oliva, Mathur, Shobana, Blanco, Rep, Vyas, Eichler, Fern, Queiroz, Kavitha, Arreola, Raton, Verma, Montes, Luna, Cruz, Mez, Ibarra, Uscanga, Kim, Pat, Severe, Hyacinth, Khoo, Allain, Yoo, Picot, Gizaw, Partida, Meng, Gurgel, Amsterdam, Karthikeyan, Lim, Morales, Stocks, Guez, Periyasamy, Mishra, Dalai, Binod, Prasad, Rathore, Tom, Quality, Karthik, Lima, Robles, Oliveira]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 21 of 26 10 Kim, J.R.; Karthikeyan, K.G. Effects of severe pretreatment conditions and lignocellulose-derived furan byproducts on anaerobic digestion of dairy manure Bioresour. Technol 2021 , 340 , 125632. [ CrossRef ] 11 Soni, S.K.; Dhull, N.P.; Soni, R.; Sharma, A. Microbiofuels: The Sustainable Energy Source for the Future. In Genomic, Proteomics, and Biotechnology ; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FA, USA, 2022; pp. 357–380 12 Ziolkowska, J.R. Biofuels technologies: An overview of feedstocks, processes, and technologies. In Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 1–19 13 Xie, Y.; Khoo, K.S.; Chew, K.W.; Devadas, V.V.; Phang, S.J.; Lim, H.R.; Show, P.L. Advancement of renewable energy technologies via artificial and microalgae photosynthesis Bioresour. Technol 2022 , 363 , 127830. [ CrossRef ] 14 Arun, N.; Dalai, A.K. Environmental and socioeconomic impact assessment of biofuels from lignocellulosic biomass. In Lignocellulosic Biomass to Liquid Biofuels ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 283–299 15 Ahmed, J.O. The effect of biofuel crops cultivation on food prices stability and food security-A Review Eurasian J. Biosci 2020 , 14 , 613–621 16 Lima, D.R.S.; de Oliveira Paranhos, A.G.; Adarme, O.F.H.; Ba ê ta, B.E.L.; Gurgel, L.V.A.; dos Santos, A.S.; de Aquino, S.F Integrated production of second-generation ethanol and biogas from sugarcane bagasse pretreated with ozone Biomass Convers Biorefin 2022 , 12 , 809–825. [ CrossRef ] 17 Singh, A.; Prajapati, P.; Vyas, S.; Gaur, V.K.; Sindhu, R.; Binod, P.; Varjani, S. A comprehensive review of feed-stocks as sustainable substrates for next-generation biofuels Bioenergy Res 2022 , 1–18. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s 1 2155-022-10440-2 (accessed on 21 November 2022) 18 Machineni, L. Lignocellulosic biofuel production: Review of alternatives Biomass Convers. Bioref 2020 , 10 , 779–791. [ CrossRef ] 19 Babu, S.; Rathore, S.S.; Singh, R.; Kumar, S.; Singh, V.K.; Yadav, S.K.; Wani, O.A. Exploring agricultural waste biomass for energy, food and feed production and pollution mitigation: A review Bioresour. Technol 2022 , 360 , 127566. [ CrossRef ] 20 Mina, D.; Hadi, S.; Jalal, A. The incorporated environmental policies and regulations into bioenergy supply chain management: A literature review Sci. Total Environ 2022 , 820 , 153202 21 Santos, F.; Eichler, P.; de Queiroz, J.H.; Gomes, F. Production of second-generation ethanol from sugarcane. In Sugarcane Biorefinery, Technology and Perspectives ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020; pp. 195–228 22 Oliva-Taravilla, A.; Moreno, A.D.; Demuez, M.; Ibarra, D.; Tom á s-Pej ó , E.; Gonz á lez-Fern á ndez, C. Unraveling the effects of laccase treatment on enzymatic hydrolysis of steam-exploded wheat straw Bioresour. Technol 2015 , 175 , 209–215. [ CrossRef ] 23 Khan, M.F.S.; Akbar, M.; Xu, Z.; Wang, H. A review on the role of pretreatment technologies in the hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass of corn stover Biomass Bioenergy 2021 , 155 , 106276. [ CrossRef ] 24 Verma, N.; Kumar, V. Impact of process parameters and plant polysaccharide hydrolysates in cellulase production by Trichoderma reesei and Neurospora crassa under wheat bran based solid state fermentation Biotechnol. Rep 2020 , 25 , e 00416. [ CrossRef ] 25 Partida-Sedas, G.; Montes-Garc í a, N.; Carvajal-Zarrabal, O.; L ó pez-Zamora, L.; G ó mez-Rodr í guez, J.; Aguilar-Uscanga, M.G Optimization of hydrolysis process to obtain fermentable sugars from sweet sorghum bagasse using a Box–Behnken design Sugar Tech 2017 , 19 , 317–325. [ CrossRef ] 26 D í az-Gonz á lez, A.; Perez Luna, M.Y.; Ram í rez Morales, E.; Saldaña-Trinidad, S.; Rojas Blanco, L.; de la Cruz-Arreola, S.; Robles- Ocampo, J.B. Assessment of the Pretreatments and Bioconversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass Recovered from the Husk of the Cocoa Pod Energies 2022 , 15 , 3544. [ CrossRef ] 27 Kou, L.; Song, Y.; Zhang, X.; Tan, T. Comparison of four types of energy grasses as lignocellulosic feedstock for the production of bio-ethanol Bioresour. Technol 2017 , 241 , 424–429. [ CrossRef ] 28 Chugh, P.; Soni, R.; Soni, S.K. Deoiled rice bran: A substrate for co-production of a consortium of hydrolytic enzymes by Aspergillus niger P-19 Waste Biomass. Valor 2016 , 7 , 513–525. [ CrossRef ] 29 Zhao, X.; Zhang, L.; Liu, D. Biomass recalcitrance Part I: The chemical compositions and physical structures affecting the enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulose Biofuel Bioprod, Bioref 2012 , 6 , 465–482. [ CrossRef ] 30 Prasad, V.; Siddiqui, L.; Mishra, P.K.; Ekielski, A.; Talegaonkar, S. Recent advancements in lignin valorization and biomedical applications: A patent review Recent Pat. Nanotechnol 2022 , 16 , 107–127. [ CrossRef ] 31 Picot-Allain, M.C.N.; Ramasawmy, B.; Emmambux, M.N. Extraction, characterisation, and application of pectin from tropical and sub-tropical fruits: A review Food Rev. Int 2022 , 38 , 282–312. [ CrossRef ] 32 Gunaratne, A.; Corke, H. Starch, Analysis of Quality Ref. Modul. Food Sci 2016 , 3 , 202–212 33 Saini, J.K.; Kaur, A.; Mathur, A. Strategies to enhance enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass for biorefinery applications: A review Bioresour. Technol 2022 , 360 , 127517. [ CrossRef ] 34 Lay, C.H.; Dharmaraja, J.; Shobana, S.; Arvindnarayan, S.; Priya, R.K.; Saratlae, R.; Kumar, G. Lignocellulose biohydrogen towards net zero emission: A review on recent developments Bioresour. Technol 2022 , 364 , 128084. [ CrossRef ] 35 Periyasamy, S.; Isabel, J.B.; Kavitha, S.; Karthik, V.; Mohamed, B.A.; Gizaw, D.G.; Aminabhavi, T.M. Recent Advances in Consolidated Bioprocessing for Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass into Bioethanol-A Review Chem. Eng. J 2022 , 453 , 139783 [ CrossRef ] 36 Sharma, A.; Aggarwal, N.K. Pretreatment Strategies: Unlocking of Lignocellulosic Substrate. In Water Hyacinth: A Potential Lignocellulosic Biomass for Bioethanol ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 37–49 37 Meng, X.; Yoo, C.G.; Li, M.; Ragauskas, A.J. Physicochemical structural changes of cellulosic substrates during enzymatic saccharification J. Appl. Biotechnl. Bioeng 2016 , 1 , 87–94.

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Lai Yee, De Sousa, Senthil Kumar, Mohammed, Dunlap, Park, Shuai, Mahmood, Saka, Ibrahim, Mikulski, Omar, Yuan, Saha, Meda, Chaturvedi, Gupta, Cao, Fang, Han, Adv, Abd, Sale, Yee, Sousa, Rocha, Chahar, Kennedy, Nanda, Iqbal, Mok, Villar, Pattnaik, London, Mendes, Wei, Sun, Qureshi, Carbajo, Luo, Dhumal, Aziz, Lai, Kumari, Senthil, Riaz, Moniruzzaman, Wyman, Ind, Bamboo, Simmons, Lett, Sarker, Thakur, Chinta, Sanchez, Mokhtar, Woody, Dale, Curran, Hafid, Naik, Green, Temesgen, Baharuddin, Aftab, Twin, Karadag, Tabatabaei, Cotta, Bahrin, Deng, Shen, Shi, Chinn]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 22 of 26 38 Mahmood, H.; Moniruzzaman, M.; Iqbal, T.; Khan, M.J. Recent advances in the pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for biofuels and value-added products Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem 2019 , 20 , 18–24. [ CrossRef ] 39 Mosier, N.; Wyman, C.E.; Dale, B.E.; Elander, R.; Lee, Y.Y.; Holtzapple, M.T. Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass Bioresour. Technol 2005 , 96 , 673–686. [ CrossRef ] 40 Garc í a, V.; Päkkilä, J.; Ojamo, H.; Muurinen, E.; Keiski, R.L. Challenges in biobutanol production: How to improve the efficiency? Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev 2011 , 15 , 964–980. [ CrossRef ] 41 Sun, S.; Sun, S.; Cao, X.; Sun, R. The role of pretreatment in improving the enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials Bioresour. Technol 2016 , 199 , 49–58. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 42 Mendes, C.V.T.; Vergaram, P.; Carbajo, J.M.; Villar, J.C.; dos Santos Rocha, J.M.; de Sousa, M.D.G.V. Bioconversion of pine stumps to ethanol: Pretreatment and simultaneous saccharification and fermentation Holzforschung 2020 , 74 , 212–216. [ CrossRef ] 43 Masran, R.; Zanirun, Z.; Bahrin, E.K.; Ibrahim, M.F.; Lai Yee, P.; Abd-Aziz, S. Harnessing the potential of ligninolytic enzymes for lignocellulosic biomass pretreatment Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol 2016 , 100 , 5231–5246. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 44 Gandam, P.K.; Chinta, M.L.; Pabbathi, N.P.P.; Baadhe, R.R.; Sharma, M.; Thakur, V.K.; Gupta, V.K. Second-generation bioethanol production from corncob–A comprehensive review on pretreatment and bioconversion strategies, including techno-economic and lifecycle perspective Ind. Crops Prod 2022 , 186 , 115245 45 Yoo, C.G.; Meng, X.; Pu, Y.; Ragauskas, A.J. The critical role of lignin in lignocellulosic biomass conversion and recent pretreatment strategies: A comprehensive review Bioresour. Technol 2020 , 301 , 122784. [ CrossRef ] 46 Periyasamy, S.; Karthik, V.; Senthil Kumar, P.; Isabel, J.B.; Temesgen, T.; Hunegnaw, B.M.; Vo, D.V.N. Chemical, physical and biological methods to convert lignocellulosic waste into value-added products. A review Environ. Chem. Lett 2022 , 20 , 1129–1152 [ CrossRef ] 47 Aftab, M.N.; Iqbal, I.; Riaz, F.; Karadag, A.; Tabatabaei, M. Different Pretreatment Methods of Lignocellulosic Biomass for Use in Biofuel Production. In Biomass for Bioenergy-Recent Trends and Future Challenges ; Intechopen: London, UK, 2019; pp. 15–92 48 Gu, B.J.; Dhumal, G.S.; Wolcott, M.P.; Ganjyal, G.M. Disruption of lignocellulosic biomass along the length of the screws with different screw elements in a twin-screw extruder Bioresour. Technol 2019 , 275 , 266–271. [ CrossRef ] 49 Kumari, D.; Chahar, P.; Singh, R. Effect of ultrasonication on biogas and ethanol production from rice straw pretreated with petha waste water and dairy waste water Int. J. Curr. Eng. Sci. Res 2018 , 5 , 65–73 50 Puligundla, P.; Oh, S.E.; Mok, C. Microwave-assisted pretreatment technologies for the conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to sugars and ethanol: A review Carbon Lett 2016 , 17 , 1–10. [ CrossRef ] 51 Mikulski, D.; Kłosowski, G.; Menka, A.; Koim-Puchowska, B. Microwave-assisted pretreatment of maize distillery stillage with the use of dilute sulfuric acid in the production of cellulosic ethanol Bioresour. Technol 2019 , 278 , 318–328. [ CrossRef ] 52 Han, S.Y.; Park, C.W.; Endo, T.; Febrianto, F.; Kim, N.H.; Lee, S.H. Extrusion process to enhance the pretreatment effect of ionic liquid for improving enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass. In Wood Science and Technology ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 1–15 53 Meng, X.; Bhagia, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Pu, Y.; Dunlap, J.R.; Shuai, L.; Ragauskas, A.J.; Yoo, C.G. Effects of the advanced organosolv pretreatment strategies on structural properties of woody biomass Ind. Crops Prod 2020 , 146 , 112144. [ CrossRef ] 54 Yuan, Z.; Li, G.; Wei, W.; Wang, J.; Fang, Z. A comparison of different preextraction methods followed by steam pretreatment of bamboo to improve the enzymatic digestibility and ethanol production Energy 2020 , 196 , 117156. [ CrossRef ] 55 Sarker, T.R.; Pattnaik, F.; Nanda, S.; Dalai, A.K.; Meda, V.; Naik, S. Hydrothermal pretreatment technologies for lignocellulosic biomass: A review of steam explosion and subcritical water hydrolysis Chemosphere 2021 , 284 , 131372. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 56 Tian, D.; Shen, F.; Yang, G.; Deng, S.; Long, L.; He, J.; Luo, L. Liquid hot water extraction followed by mechanical extrusion as a chemical-free pretreatment approach for cellulosic ethanol production from rigid hardwood Fuel 2019 , 252 , 589–597. [ CrossRef ] 57 Sanchez, C. Lignocellulosic residues: Biodegradation and bioconversion by fungi Biotechnol. Adv 2009 , 27 , 185–194. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 58 Curran, L.M.L.K.; Sale, K.L.; Simmons, B.A. Review of advances in the development of laccases for the valorization of lignin to enable the production of lignocellulosic biofuels and bioproducts Biotechnol. Adv 2021 , 54 , 107809. [ CrossRef ] 59 Shi, J.; Chinn, M.S.; Sharma-Shivappa, R.R. Microbial pretreatment of cotton stalks by solid state cultivation of Phanerochaete chrysosporium Bioresour Technol 2008 , 99 , 6556–6564. [ CrossRef ] 60 Chaturvedi, V.; Verma, P. An overview of key pretreatment processes employed for bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass into biofuels and value added products Biotech 2013 , 5 , 415–431. [ CrossRef ] 61 Rabemanolontsoa, H.; Saka, S. Various pretreatments of lignocellulosics Bioresour Technol 2016 , 199 , 83–91. [ CrossRef ] 62 Saha, B.C.; Qureshi, N.; Kennedy, G.J.; Cotta, M.A. Biological pretreatment of corn stover with white-rot fungus for improved enzymatic hydrolysis Int. Biodeter. Biodegrad 2016 , 109 , 29–35. [ CrossRef ] 63 Kumar, A.K.; Sharma, S. Recent updates on different methods of pretreatment of lignocellulosic feedstocks: A review Bioresour Bioprocess 2017 , 4 , 7. [ CrossRef ] 64 Hafid, H.S.; Baharuddin, A.S.; Mokhtar, M.N.; Omar, F.N.; Mohammed, M.A.; Wakisaka, M. Enhanced laccase production for oil palm biomass delignification using biological pretreatment and its estimation at biorefinary scale Biomass Bioenergy 2021 , 144 , 105904. [ CrossRef ] 65 Ma, K.; Ruan, Z. Production of a lignocellulolytic enzyme system for simultaneous biodelignification and saccharification of corn stover employing co-culture of fungi Bioresour Technol 2015 , 175 , 586–593. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: De Vries, Farhat, Ali, Imran, Clark, Zehra, Oni, Demirci, Rana, Syed, Unique, Raw, Khare, Seed, Stone, Anwar, Kabel, Chai, Pol, Wahab, Venkatachalam, Halder, Pandit, Organ, Novel, Sadaf, Cham, Sohail, Fan, Alghamdi, Zafar, Bhat, Rakshit, Catal, Mahat, Dhawan, Soren, Upadhyay, Peralta, Chowdhury, Zakaria, Vries, Khemakhem, Ramteke, Boukhris, Srivastava, Bharathi, Shake, Mondal, Fatokun, Kriaa, Lin, Cheng]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 23 of 26 66 Sun, Y.; Cheng, J. Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: A review Bioresour. Technol 2002 , 83 , 1–11 [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 67 Rastogi, S.; Soni, R.; Kaur, J.; Soni, S.K. Unravelling the capability of Pyrenophora phaeocomes S-1 for the production of lignohemicellulolytic enzyme cocktail and simultaneous bio-delignification of rice straw for enhanced enzymatic saccharification Bioresour. Technol 2016 , 222 , 458–469. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 68 Yan, X.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, K.; Si, M.; Liu, M.; Chai, L. Bacteria-enhanced dilute acid pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass Bioresour. Technol 2017 , 245 , 419425. [ CrossRef ] 69 Liang, C.; Wang, Q.; Wang, W.; Lin, C.S.K.; Hu, Y.; Qi, W. Enhancement of an efficient enzyme cocktail from Penicillium consortium on biodegradation of pretreated poplar Chem. Eng. J 2023 , 452 , 139352. [ CrossRef ] 70 Bhat, M.K. Cellulases and related enzymes in biotechnology Biotechnol. Adv 2000 , 18 , 355–383. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 71 Sadaf, A.; Khare, S.K. Production of Sporotrichum thermophile xylanase by solid state fermentation utilizing deoiled Jatropha curcas seed cake and its application in xylooligosachharide synthesis Bioresour. Technol 2014 , 153 , 126–130. [ CrossRef ] 72 Srivastava, N.; Srivastava, M.; Upadhyay, S.N.; Mishra, P.K.; Ramteke, P.W. Biofuels from Protein-Rich Lignocellulosic Biomass: New Approach. In Sustainable Approaches for Biofuels Production Technologies ; Springer: Cham, Switherland, 2019; pp. 83–92 73 Janveja, C.; Rana, S.S.; Soni, S.K. Kitchen waste residues as potential renewable biomass resources for the production of multiple fungal carbohydrases and second generation bioethanol J. Technol. Innov. Renew. Energy 2013 , 2 , 186–200 74 Venkatanagaraju, E.; Bharathi, N.; Sindhuja, R.H.; Chowdhury, R.R.; Sreelekha, Y. Extraction and Purification of Pectin from Agro-Industrial Wastes. In Pectins-Extraction, Purification, Characterization and Applications ; Intechopen: London, UK, 2019 75 Gupta, A.; Verma, J.P. Sustainable bio-ethanol production from agro-residues: A review Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev 2015 , 41 , 550–567. [ CrossRef ] 76 Luo, Y.; Li, Z.; Li, X.; Liu, X.; Fan, J.; Clark, J.H.; Hu, C. The production of furfural directly from hemicellulose in lignocellulosic biomass: A review Catal. Today 2019 , 319 , 14–24. [ CrossRef ] 77 Peralta, A.G.; Venkatachalam, S.; Stone, S.C.; Pattathil, S. Xylan epitope profiling: An enhanced approach to study organ development-dependent changes in xylan structure, biosynthesis, and deposition in plant cell walls Biotechnol. Biofuels 2017 , 10 , 245. [ CrossRef ] 78 Ye, Y.; Li, X.; Zhao, J. Production and characteristics of a novel Xylose-and Alkali-tolerant GH 43 β -xylosidase from Penicillium oxalicum for promoting hemicellulose degradation Sci. Rep 2017 , 7 , 11600. [ CrossRef ] 79 Dhawan, S.; Kaur, J. Microbial mannases: An overview of production and applications Crit. Rev. Biotechnol 2007 , 27 , 197–216 [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 80 Bastawde, K.B. Xylan structure, microbial xylanases, and their mode of action World J. Microb. Biotechnol 1992 , 8 , 353–368 [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 81 Moreira, L.R.S.; Filho, E.X.F. An overview of mannan structure and mannan-degrading enzyme systems Appl. Microbiol Biotechnol 2008 , 79 , 165–178. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 82 Kabel, M.A.; Jurak, E.; Mäkelä, M.R.; De Vries, R.P. Occurrence and function of enzymes for lignocellulose degradation in commercial Agaricus bisporus cultivation Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol 2017 , 101 , 4363–4369. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 83 Mondal, S.; Soren, J.P.; Mondal, J.; Rakshit, S.; Halder, S.K.; Mondal, K.C. Contemporaneous synthesis of multiple carbohydrate debranching enzymes from newly isolated Aspergillus fumigatus SKF-2 under solid state fermentation: A unique enzyme mixture for proficient saccharification of plant bioresources Ind. Crops Prod 2020 , 150 , 112409. [ CrossRef ] 84 Zehra, M.; Syed, M.N.; Sohail, M. Banana Peels: A Promising Substrate for the Coproduction of Pectinase and Xylanase from Aspergillus fumigatus MS 16 Pol. J. Microbiol 2020 , 69 , 19–26. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 85 Olajuyigbe, F.M.; Fatokun, C.O.; Oni, O.I. Effective Substrate Loading for Saccharification of Corn Cob and Concurrent Production of Lignocellulolytic Enzymes by Fusarium oxysporum and Sporothrix carnis Curr. Biotechnol 2019 , 8 , 109–115. [ CrossRef ] 86 Ezeilo, U.R.; Lee, C.T.; Huyop, F.; Zakaria, I.I.; Wahab, R.A. Raw oil palm frond leaves as cost-effective substrate for cellulase and xylanase productions by Trichoderma asperellum UC 1 under solid-state fermentation J. Environ. Manag 2019 , 243 , 206–217 [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 87 Ezeilo, U.R.; Wahab, R.A.; Mahat, N.A. Optimization studies on cellulase and xylanase production by Rhizopus oryzae UC 2 using raw oil palm frond leaves as substrate under solid state fermentation Renew. Energy 2019 , 156 , 1301–1312. [ CrossRef ] 88 Cekmecelioglu, D.; Demirci, A. Production of Cellulase and Xylanase Enzymes Using Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS) by Trichoderma reesei at Shake-Flask Scale and the Validation in the Benchtop Scale Bioreactor Waste Biomass Valor 2020 , 11 , 6575–6584. [ CrossRef ] 89 Yan, S.; Xu, Y.; Yu, X.W. Rational engineering of xylanase hyper-producing system in Trichoderma reesei for efficient biomass degradation Biotechnol. Biofuels 2021 , 14 , 1–17. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 90 Blibech, M.; Farhat-Khemakhem, A.; Kriaa, M.; Aslouj, R.; Boukhris, I.; Alghamdi, O.A.; Chouayekh, H. Optimization of β -mannanase production by Bacillus subtilis US 191 using economical agricultural substrates Biotechnol. Prog 2020 , 36 , 2989 [ CrossRef ] 91 Yadav, A.; Ali, A.A.M.; Ingawale, M.; Raychaudhuri, S.; Gantayet, L.; Pandit, A. Enhanced co-production of pectinase, cellulase and xylanase enzymes from Bacillus subtilis ABDR 01 upon ultrasonic irradiation Proc. Biochem 2020 , 92 , 197–203. [ CrossRef ] 92 Khan, M.I.M.; Zafar, M.; Anwar, Z.; Imran, M. Effect of expression of additional catalytic domain on characteristics of Xylanase Z of Clostridium thermocellum Biologia 2019 , 74 , 1395–1403. [ CrossRef ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: Hasnaoui, Arora, Chawla, Pharm, Salgado, Lps, Carmona, Marzo, Bilal, Gene, Abraham, Bakry, Gopinath, Tayo, Hyd, Joshi, Arshad, Meini, Choudhary, Caro, Chinni, Genet, Bano, Zeni, Stella, Duhan, Anbu, Amat, Hashim, Nnaji, Monteiro, Anselmi, Amande, Meas, Romanini, Cakes, Hamann, Alonge, Mohsin, Zia, Nain, Bunch, Voon, Ndubuisi, Aran, Ado, Nene, Colet, Reddy, Tuna, Noronha, Barrena, Bhatti, Amin, Adebayo, Belo, Abbasi, Gea, Begum, Cerda, Blandino, Barrios, Farinas, Pak, Empty, Adejuwon, Grando, Bhandari]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 24 of 26 93 Hamann, P.R.; Gomes, T.C.; de MB Silva, L.; Noronha, E.F. Influence of lignin-derived phenolic compounds on the Clostridium thermocellum endo- β -1, 4-xylanase XynA Proc. Biochem 2020 , 92 , 1–9. [ CrossRef ] 94 Sinjaroonsak, S.; Chaiyaso, T.; Aran, H. Optimization of Cellulase and Xylanase Productions by Streptomyces thermocoprophilus Strain TC 13 W Using Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch and Tuna Condensate as Substrates Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2019 , 189 , 76–86 [ CrossRef ] 95 Pedrolli, D.B.; Monteiro, A.C.; Gomes, E.; Carmona, E.C. Pectin and pectinases: Production, characterization and industrial application of microbial pectinolytic enzymes Open Biotechnol. J 2009 , 3 , 9–18. [ CrossRef ] 96 Begum, G.; Munjam, S. Carbon and Nitrogen Sources Effect on Pectinase Synthesis by Aspergillus niger Under Submerged Fermentation Biosci. Biotechnol. Res. Asia 2021 , 18 , 185–195. [ CrossRef ] 97 Kumar, Y.S.; Varakumar, S.; Reddy, O.V. Production and optimization of polygalacturonase from mango ( Mangifera indica L.) peel using Fusarium moniliforme in solid state fermentation World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol 2010 , 26 , 1973–1980. [ CrossRef ] 98 Amin, F.; Mohsin, A.; Bhatti, H.N.; Bilal, M. Production, thermodynamic characterization, and fruit juice quality improvement characteristics of an Exo-polygalacturonase from Penicillium janczewskii Biochim Biophy. Acta Proteins Proteom 2020 , 1868 , 140379 [ CrossRef ] 99 Siamphan, C.; Arnthong, J.; Tharad, S.; Zhang, F.; Yang, J.; Laothanachareon, T. Production of D-galacturonic acid from pomelo peel using the crude enzyme from recombinant Trichoderma reesei expressing a heterologous exopolygalacturonase gene J. Clean Prod 2022 , 331 , 129958. [ CrossRef ] 100. Zeni, J.; Cence, K.; Grando, C.E.; Tiggermann, L.; Colet, R.; Lerin, L.A.; Valduga, E. Screening of pectinase-producing microorganisms with polygalacturonase activity Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2011 , 163 , 383–392. [ CrossRef ] 101. Saranraj, P.; Stella, D. Fungal amylase—A review Int. J. Microbiol. Res 2013 , 4 , 203–211 102. Adejuwon, A.O.; Tsygankova, V.A.; Alonge, O. Effect of cultivation conditions on activity of α -amylase from a tropical strain Aspergillus flavusLink J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. Food Sci 2021 , 7 , 571–575. [ CrossRef ] 103. Bano, S.; Iqbal, S.; Siddiqui, K.; Abbasi, K. Purification and characterization of [beta]-galactosidase from Aspergillus fumigatus PCSIR-2013 Pak. J. Pharm. Sci 2021 , 34 , 1333–1341 104. Bellaouchi, R.; Abouloifa, H.; Rokni, Y.; Hasnaoui, A.; Ghabbour, N.; Hakkou, A.; Bechchari, A.; Asehraou, A. Characterization and optimization of extracellular enzymes production by Aspergillus niger strains isolated from date by-products J. Genet. Eng Biotechnol 2021 , 19 , 50. [ CrossRef ] 105. Gopinath, S.C.; Anbu, P.; Arshad, M.M.; Lakshmipriya, T.; Voon, C.H.; Hashim, U.; Chinni, S.V. Biotechnological process in microbial amylase production BioMed Res. Int 2017 , 2017 , 1272193. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 106. Mohanram, S.; Amat, D.; Choudhary, J.; Arora, A.; Nain, L. Novel perspectives for evolving enzyme cocktails for lignocellulose hydrolysis in biorefineries Sustain. Chem. Process 2013 , 1 , 1–15. [ CrossRef ] 107. Sadh, P.K.; Chawla, P.; Bhandari, L.; Duhan, J.S. Bio-enrichment of functional properties of peanut oil cakes by solid state fermentation using Aspergillus oryzae J. Food Meas. Character 2017 , 12 , 622–633. [ CrossRef ] 108. Leite, P.; Silva, C.; Salgado, J.M.; Belo, I. Simultaneous production of lignocellulolytic enzymes and extraction of antioxidant compounds by solid-state fermentation of agro-industrial wastes Ind. Crops Prod 2019 , 137 , 315–322. [ CrossRef ] 109. Marzo, C.; D í az, A.B.; Caro, I.; Blandino, A. Valorization of agro-industrial wastes to produce hydrolytic enzymes by fungal solid-state fermentation Waste Manag. Res 2019 , 37 , 149–156. [ CrossRef ] 110. Amande, T.; Adebayo-Tayo, B.; Ndubuisi-Nnaji, U.; Ado, B. Production and partial characterization of pectinases from mango peels by Aspergillus tamarii J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. Food Sci 2020 , 9 , 59–62 111. Melnichuk, N.; Braia, M.J.; Anselmi, P.A.; Meini, M.R.; Romanini, D. Valorization of two agroindustrial wastes to produce alpha-amylase enzyme from Aspergillus oryzae by solid-state fermentation Waste Manag 2020 , 106 , 155–161. [ CrossRef ] 112. Iqbal, H.M.N.; Ahmed, I.; Zia, M.A.; Irfan, M. Purification and characterization of the kinetic parameters of cellulase produced from wheat straw by Trichoderma viride under SSF and its detergent compatibility Adv. Biosci. Biotechnol 2011 , 2 , 149–156 [ CrossRef ] 113. Sadh, P.K.; Duhan, S.; Duhan, J.S. Agro-industrial wastes and their utilization using solid state fermentation: A review Bioresour Bioprocess 2018 , 5 , 1–15. [ CrossRef ] 114. Farinas, C.S. Developments in solid-state fermentation for the production of biomass-degrading enzymes for the bioenergy sector Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev 2015 , 52 , 179–188. [ CrossRef ] 115. Nene, S.N.; Joshi, K.S. A comparative study of production of hydrophobin like proteins (HYD-LPs) in submerged liquid and solid state fermentation from white rot fungus Pleurotus ostreatus Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol 2020 , 23 , 101440 116. Barrios-Gonz á lez, J. Secondary Metabolites Production: Physiological Advantages in Solid-State Fermentation. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 257–283 117. El-Bakry, M.; Abraham, J.; Cerda, A.; Barrena, R.; Ponsa, S.; Gea, T.; S á nchez, A. From wastes to high value added products: Novel aspects of SSF in the production of enzymes Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol 2015 , 45 , 1999–2042. [ CrossRef ] 118. Rudakiya, D.M. Strategies to improve solid-state fermentation technology. In New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 155–180 119. Kaur, J.; Chugh, P.; Soni, R.; Soni, S.K. A low-cost approach for the generation of enhanced sugars and ethanol from rice straw using in-house produced cellulase-hemicellulase consortium from A. niger P-19 Bioresour. Technol. Rep 2020 , 11 , 100469 [ CrossRef ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: De Lira, Da Costa, De Melo, Jorgensen, Olsson, Gama, Raj, Dourado, Banerjee, Zeng, Soc, King, Medeiros, Arjmand, Marine, Bon, Sarao, Alyahya, Afr, Fawole, Goyal, Gov, Coelho, Artola, Lira, Dodi, Fernandes, Melo, Teles, Khaled, Grover, Mar, Alharbi, Wan, Tripathi, Salom, Leal, Front, Alavi, Tonon, Costa, Mahalakshmi, Shakir, Panwar, Souza, Lateef, Paulino, Khade, Terzi, Rajabi, Rodrigues, Pan, Font, Bakhtawar, Baji, Tola, Barreto, Negi, Moutinho, Saud, Maninder, Pinotti, Karp]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 25 of 26 120. Soni, S.K.; Sharma, A.; Soni, R. Fungal cocktail of multiple hydrolytic enzymes and method of production thereof. Indian Patent 202213059023, 2022. Available online: https://ipindiaservices.gov.in/PatentSearch/PatentSearch/ViewApplicationStatus (accessed on 21 November 2022) 121. Kalogeris, E.; Christakopoulos, P.; Katapodis, P.; Alexiou, A.; Vlachou, S.; Kekos, D.; Macris, B.J. Production and characterization of cellulolytic enzymes from the thermophilic fungus Thermoascus aurantiacus under solid state cultivation of agricultural wastes Process Biochem 2003 , 38 , 1099–1104. [ CrossRef ] 122. Negi, S.; Banerjee, R. Optimization of extraction and purification of glucoamylase produced by A. awamori in solid state fermentation Biotechnol. Bioprocess. Eng 2009 , 14 , 60–66. [ CrossRef ] 123. Prasoulas, G.; Gentikis, A.; Konti, A.; Kalantzi, S.; Kekos, D.; Mamma, D. Bioethanol Production from Food Waste Applying the Multienzyme System Produced On-Site by Fusarium oxysporum F 3 and Mixed Microbial Cultures Fermentation 2020 , 6 , 39 [ CrossRef ] 124. Grover, A.; Maninder, A.; Sarao, L.K. Production of fungal amylase and cellulase enzyme via solid state fermentation using Aspergillus oryzae and Trichoderma reesei Int. J. Adv. Res. Technol 2013 , 2 , 108–124 125. Rana, S.S.; Janveja, C.; Soni, S.K. Brewer’s spent grain as a valuable substrate for low cost production of fungal cellulases by statistical modeling in solid state fermentation and generation of cellulosic ethanol Int. J. Food. Ferment. Technol 2013 , 3 , 41–55 [ CrossRef ] 126. Kaur, P.S.; Kaur, S.; Kaur, H.; Sharma, A.; Raj, P.; Panwar, S. Solid substrate fermentation using agro industrial waste: New approach for amylase production by Bacillus licheniformis Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci 2015 , 4 , 712–717 127. Mahalakshmi, N.; Jayalakshmi, S. Amylase, cellulase and xylanase production from a novel bacterial isolate Achromobacter xylosoxidans isolated from marine environment Int. J. Adv. Res. Biol. Sci 2016 , 3 , 230–233 128. Mar í n, M.; Artola, A.; S á nchez, A. Optimization of down-stream for cellulases produced under solid-state fermentation of coffee husk Waste Biomass Valor 2019 , 10 , 2761–2772. [ CrossRef ] 129. Mar í n, M.; S á nchez, A.; Artola, A. Production and recovery of cellulases through solid-state fermentation of selected lignocellulosic wastes J. Clean. Prod 2019 , 209 , 937–946. [ CrossRef ] 130. Salom ã o, G.S.; Agnezi, J.C.; Paulino, L.B.; Hencker, L.B.; de Lira, T.S.; Tardioli, P.W.; Pinotti, L.M. Production of cellulases by solid state fermentation using natural and pretreated sugarcane bagasse with different fungi Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol 2019 , 17 , 1–6 [ CrossRef ] 131. Teles, A.S.; Ch á vez, D.W.; Oliveira, R.A.; Bon, E.P.; Terzi, S.C.; Souza, E.F.; Tonon, R.V. Use of grape pomace for the production of hydrolytic enzymes by solid-state fermentation and recovery of its bioactive compounds Food Res. Int 2019 , 120 , 441–448 [ CrossRef ] 132. Almanaa, T.N.; Vijayaraghavan, P.; Alharbi, N.S.; Kadaikunnan, S.; Khaled, J.M.; Alyahya, S.A. Solid state fermentation of amylase production from Bacillus subtilis D 19 using agro-residues J. King Saud. Univ. Sci 2020 , 32 , 1555–1561. [ CrossRef ] 133. Jovanovi´c, M.; Vuˇcurovi´c, D.; Baji´c, B.; Dodi´c, S.; Vlajkov, V.; Jevti´c-Muˇcibabi´c, R. Optimization of the simultaneous production of cellulase and xylanase by submerged and solid-state fermentation of wheat chaff J. Serb. Chem Soc 2020 , 85 , 177–189. [ CrossRef ] 134. Rodrigues, I.D.; Barreto, J.T.; Moutinho, B.L.; Oliveira, M.M.; da Silva, R.S.; Fernandes, M.F.; Fernandes, R.P.M. Production of xylanases by Bacillus sp. TC-DT 13 in solid state fermentation using bran wheat Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol 2020 , 50 , 91–97 135. Khade, S.M.; Srivastava, S.K.; Kumar, K.; Sharma, K.; Goyal, A.; Tripathi, A.D. Optimization of clinical uricase production by Bacillus cereus under submerged fermentation, its purification and structure characterization Process. Biochem 2018 , 75 , 49–58 [ CrossRef ] 136. Letti, L.A.; V í tola, F.M.; de Melo Pereira, G.V.; Karp, S.G.; Medeiros, A.B.; da Costa, E.S.; Soccol, C.R. Solid-State Fermentation for the Production of Mushrooms. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 285–318 137. Rodrigues, A.C.; Font ã o, A.I.; Coelho, A.; Leal, M.; da Silva, F.A.; Wan, Y.; Dourado, F.; Gama, M. Response surface statistical optimization of bacterial nanocellulose fermentation in static culture using a low-cost medium New Biotechnol 2019 , 49 , 19–27 [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 138. Pan, S.; Chen, G.; Wu, R.; Cao, X.; Zeng, W.; Liang, Z. Non-sterile submerged fermentation of fibrinolytic enzyme by marine Bacillus subtilis harboring antibacterial activity with starvation strategy Front. Microbiol 2019 , 10 , 1025. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 139. Darouneh, E.; Alavi, A.; Vosoughi, M.; Arjmand, M.; Seifkordi, A.; Rajabi, R. Citric acid production: Surface culture versus submerged culture Afr. J. Microbiol. Res 2009 , 3 , 541–545 140. Elegbede, J.A.; Lateef, A. Valorization of Corn-Cob by Fungal Isolates for Production of Xylanase in Submerged and Solid State Fermentation Media and Potential Biotechnological Applications Waste Biomass Valor 2018 , 9 , 1273. [ CrossRef ] 141. Irfan, M.; Bakhtawar, J.; Shakir, H.A.; Khan, M.; Ali, S. Utilization of peanut shells as substrate for cellulase production in submerged fermentation through Box-Behnken Design Int. J. Biol. Chem 2020 , 12 , 28–39. [ CrossRef ] 142. Fawole, O.B.; Odunfa, S.A. Some factors affecting production of pectic enzymes by Aspergillus niger Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad 2003 , 52 , 223–227. [ CrossRef ] 143. Krough, K.B.R.; Morkeberg, A.; Jorgensen, H.; Frisvad, J.C.; Olsson, L. Screening genus Penicillium for producers of cellulolytic and xylanolytic enzymes Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2004 , 114 , 389–401. [ CrossRef ] 144. Elisashvili, V.; Penninckx, M.; Kachlishvili, E.; Asatiani, M.; Kvesitadze, G. Use of Pleurotus dryinus for lignocellulolytic enzymes production in submerged fermentation of mandarin peels and tree leaves Enzym. Microb. Technol 2006 , 38 , 998–1004. [ CrossRef ]

[Find the meaning and references behind the names: De Almeida, De Castro, Da Cruz, Kote, Bischoff, Sebastian, Almeida, Olive, Omotosho, Bhatt, Hassan, Nour, Marques, Awad, Sarkar, Ferreira, Bamigboye, Ismail, Bao, Duarte, Zong, Agbabiaka, Nagar, Ajide, Stephen, Manjula, Hena, Naim, Castro, Tayeh, Hashem, Hadiza, Khattab, Melendez, Fonseca, Pedro, Abo, Blend, Elnasr, Aravind, Adeniyi, Saxena, Jordan, Ideas, Carlos, Pandiyan, Bal, Mahajan, Lawal, Property]

Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 3590 26 of 26 145. Vidyalakshmi, R.; Paranthaman, R.; Indhumathi, J. Amylase production on submerged fermentation by Bacillus spp World J Chem 2009 , 4 , 89–91 146. de Castro, A.M.; Pedro, K.C.N.R.; da Cruz, J.C.; Ferreira, M.C.; Leite, S.G.F.; Pereira, N Trichoderma harzianum IOC-4038: A promising strain for the production of a cellulolytic complex with significant β -glucosidase activity from sugarcane bagasse cellulignin Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2010 , 162 , 2111–2122. [ CrossRef ] 147. de Almeida, M.N.; Guimar ã es, V.M.; Bischoff, K.M.; Falkoski, D.L.; Pereira, O.L.; Gonçalves, D.S. Cellulases and hemicellulases from endophytic Acremonium species and its application on sugarcane bagasse hydrolysis Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2011 , 165 , 594–610. [ CrossRef ] 148. Nagar, S.; Gupta, V.K.; Kumar, D.; Kumar, L.; Kuhad, R.C. Production and optimization of cellulase-free, alkali-stable xylanase by Bacillus pumilus SV-85 S in submerged fermentation J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol 2010 , 37 , 71–83. [ CrossRef ] 149. Kavuthodi, B.; Sebastian, D. Biotechnological valorization of pineapple stem for pectinase production by Bacillus subtilis BKDS 1: Media formulation and statistical optimization for submerged fermentation Biocatal. Agricl. Biotechnol 2018 , 16 , 715–722 [ CrossRef ] 150. Ismail, S.A.; Khattab, O.K.H.; Nour, S.A.; Awad, G.E.; Abo-Elnasr, A.A.; Hashem, A.M. A Thermodynamic Study of Partially- Purified Penicillium humicola β -mannanase Produced by Statistical Optimization Jordan J. Biol. Sci 2019 , 12 , 209–217 151. Sharma, D.; Mahajan, R. Development of Methodology for Concurrent Maximum Production of Alkaline Xylanase–Pectinase Enzymes in Short Submerged Fermentation Cycle Waste Biomass Valor 2019 , 11 , 6065–6072. [ CrossRef ] 152. Arekemase, M.O.; Omotosho, I.O.; Agbabiaka, T.O.; Ajide-Bamigboye, N.T.; Lawal, A.K.; Ahmed, T. Optimization of bacteria pectinolytic enzyme production using banana peel as substrate under submerged fermentation Sci. World J 2020 , 15 , 56–63 153. Kote, N.V.; Manjula, A.C.; Vishwanatha, T.; Aravind, G.P. Production, Partial Purification and Characterisation of α -Amylase from Aspergillus niger using Aqueous Two Phase System (ATPS) Res. J. Biotechnol 2020 , 15 , 5 154. Liu, J.; Yang, J.; Wang, R.; Liu, L.; Zhang, Y.; Bao, H.M. Comparative characterization of extracellular enzymes secreted by Phanerochaete chrysosporium during solid-state and submerged fermentation Int. J. Biol. Macromol 2020 , 152 , 288–294. [ CrossRef ] 155. Stephen, A.C.; Adeniyi, O.A.; Hadiza, J. Effect of optimization conditions on submerged fermentation of corn bran for the production of xylanase enzyme World J. Adv. Res. Rev 2020 , 5 , 19–25. [ CrossRef ] 156. Thite, V.S.; Nerurkar, A.S.; Baxi, N.N. Optimization of concurrent production of xylanolytic and pectinolytic enzymes by Bacillus safensis M 35 and Bacillus altitudinis J 208 using agro-industrial biomass through Response Surface Methodology Sci. Rep 2020 , 10 , 3824. [ CrossRef ] 157. Girio, F.M.; Fonseca, C.; Carvalheiro, F.; Duarte, C.L.; Marques, S.; Bogel-qukasik, R. Hemicelluloses for fuel ethanol: A review Bioresour. Technol 2010 , 101 , 4775–4800. [ CrossRef ] 158. Melendez, J.R.; M á ty á s, B.; Hena, S.; Lowy, D.A.; El Salous, A. Perspectives in the production of bioethanol: A review of sustainable methods, technologies, and bioprocesses Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev 2022 , 160 , 112260. [ CrossRef ] 159. Sarkar, N.; Aikat, K Aspergillus fumigatus NITDGPKA 3 provides for increased cellulase production Int. J. Chem. Eng 2014 , 5 , 959845 160. Tayeh, A.H.; Naim, N.; Carlos, D.; Ahmed, T.; Hassan, A. Potential of bioethanol production from olive mill solid wastes Bioresour Technol 2014 , 152 , 24–30. [ CrossRef ] 161. Sarbishei, S.; Goshadrou, A.; Hatamipour, M.S. Mild sodium hydroxide pretreatment of tobacco product waste to enable efficient bioethanol production by separate hydrolysis and fermentation Biomass Convers. Biorefin 2021 , 11 , 2963–2973. [ CrossRef ] 162. Roberto, I.C.; Castro, R.C.; Silva, J.P.; Mussatto, S.I. Ethanol Production from High Solid Loading of Rice Straw by Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation in a Non-Conventional Reactor Energies 2020 , 13 , 2090. [ CrossRef ] 163. Zhu, J.Q.; Zong, Q.J.; Li, W.C.; Chai, M.Z.; Xu, T.; Liu, H.; Fan, H.; Li, B.Z.; Yuan, Y.J. Temperature profiled simultaneous saccharification and co-fermentation of corn stover increases ethanol production at high solid loading Energy Convers. Manag 2020 , 205 , 112344. [ CrossRef ] 164. Pandiyan, K.; Singh, A.; Singh, S.; Saxena, A.K.; Nain, L. Technological interventions for utilization of crop residues and weedy biomass for second generation bio-ethanol production Renew. Energy 2019 , 132 , 723–741. [ CrossRef ] 165. da Silva, F.L.; Dos Santos, D.A.; de Oliveira, C.A.; Magalh ã es, E.R.B.; Dos Santos, E.S. Evaluation of blend production of cellulases and xylanases Using pretreated and recycled carnauba straw Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 2022 , 194 , 901–913. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 166. Chen, H.; Fu, X. Industrial technologies for bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev 2016 , 57 , 468–478. [ CrossRef ] 167. Bhatt, S.M.; Bal, J.S. Bioprocessing perspective in biorefineries. In Sustainable Approaches for Biofuels Production Technologies ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 1–23 Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Other Environmental Sciences Concepts:

[back to top]

Discover the significance of concepts within the article: ‘Microbial Enzyme Systems in the Production of Second Generation Bioethanol’. Further sources in the context of Environmental Sciences might help you critically compare this page with similair documents:

Mushroom, Mannan, Biofuel, Fossil fuel, Glucose, Fermentation, Solar energy, Molecular biology, Banana peel, Mode of action, Urbanization, Alkali, Carbon dioxide emission, Global warming, Cost effective, Aspergillus, Bacillus species, Aspergillus niger, Crystalline structure, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Cost-effective method, Oxidizing agent, Citric Acid, Chemical processes, Rice bran, Wheat bran, Microbial fermentation, Bacillus sp., Bacillus subtilis, Solid state fermentation, Pectin lyase, Submerged fermentation, Enzyme production, Response-surface methodology, Starch, Biofuel production, Enzymatic hydrolysis, Fusarium oxysporum, Aspergillus flavus, Hydrolysis, Bioethanol production, Biomass, Plant biomass, Hydrogen bond, Bacillus cereus, Amylase, Industrial scale, Sugarcane bagasse, Statistical optimization, Fibrinolytic enzyme, Agro-industrial residue, Acid hydrolysis, Aspergillus fumigatus, Trichoderma harzianum, Lignocellulosic waste, Polysaccharide, Aspergillus and Penicillium, Coffee husk, Structural composition, Substrate specificity, Bioethanol, Biomass conversion, Environmentally friendly method, Fermentable sugar, Agricultural waste, Lignocellulosic biomass, Bioenergy, Aspergillus oryzae, Trichoderma viride, Achromobacter xylosoxidans, Separate hydrolysis and fermentation, Enzymatic saccharification, Kitchen waste, High specificity, Eco-friendly approaches, Synthetic Biology, Agro-industrial waste, Trichoderma, Enzymatic action, Lignin, Penicillium, Bacillus pumilus, Bacillus licheniformis, Xylan degradation, Rice husk, Pectinase, Cellulase, White Rot fungi, Endoglucanase, Wheat straw, Algal biomass, Municipal solid waste, Pectin, Carbohydrate, Aqueous two phase system, Microbial invasion, Plant cell wall, Fermentation Technology, Enzyme technology, Saccharification, Brewer's spent grain, Agro Waste, Natural substrate, Vegetable waste, Value added product, Statistical Modeling, Secondary reaction, Glycosidic linkage, Lignocellulose, Hydrolytic enzyme, Waste biomass, Cellulose structure, Xylanase, Glucoamylase, Inhibitor, Amylase production, Solid state, Hemicellulose, Polygalacturonase, Pectate lyase, Enzyme system, Milder reaction conditions, Plant disease, Pectic polysaccharide, Transportation fuel, Furfural, Enzyme, Bacillus spp, Pretreatment, Cellulose, Environmental issue, Rice straw, Bacillus safensis, Food crop, Fruit peel, Coprinus comatus, Bacterial nanocellulose, Galacturonic acid, Xylose, Fusarium, Hydrolyze, Sugar molecule, Free sugar, Apple pomace, Cellobiose, Steam-explosion, Xylan, Acidic treatment, Food ingredient, Corn cob, Pectinolytic enzyme, Trichoderma reesei, Pectic substances, Crop residue, Separate hydrolysis, Microbial enzyme, Medium viscosity, Glycosidic bond, Polysaccharide chain, Feedstock, Biorefinery, Brewers spent grain, Lignocellulolytic enzymes, CO 2 emission, GHG, Second-generation bioethanol, Enzyme cocktail, Simultaneous saccharification, Lignin Degradation, Barley Straw, Glycosyl hydrolases, Biological pretreatment, Dilute acid hydrolysis, Biomass residues, Corn stover, Phanerochaete chrysosporium, Lignin degrading enzymes, Second generation biofuels, Lignin and hemicellulose, Lignocellulosic residue, Consolidated bioprocessing, Peanut Shell, Non-reducing end, Liquid biofuel, Cellobiohydrolase, Second-generation biofuel, Monomeric sugars, Two-stage process.