| [1] Li Z, Ji X, Kan S, et al. Past, present, and future industrial biotechnology in China. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol, 2010, 122: 1-42.
[2] Buraimoh O M, Ilori M O, Amund O O, et al. Assessment of bacterial degradation of lignocellulosic residues (sawdust) in a tropical estuarine microcosm using improvised floating raft equipment. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 2015, 104: 186-193.
[3] Zhong C, Cao Y X, Li B Z, et al. Biofuels in China: past, present and future. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 2010, 4(3): 326-342.
[4] Farrell A E, Plevin R J, Turner B T, et al. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science, 2006, 311(5760): 506-508.
[5] Solomon B D, Barnes J R, and Halvorsen K E. Grain and cellulosic ethanol: history, economics, and energy policy. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2007, 31(6): 416-425.
[6] Parawira W, Tekere M. Biotechnological strategies to overcome inhibitors in lignocellulose hydrolysates for ethanol production: review. Crit Rev Biotechnol, 2011, 31(1): 20-31.
[7] Ingram T, Wormeyer K, Lima J C, et al. Comparison of different pretreatment methods for lignocellulosic materials. Part I: conversion of rye straw to valuable products. Bioresour Technol, 2011, 102(8): 5221-5228.
[8] Marker T L, Felix L G, Linck M B, et al. Integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) for the direct production of gasoline and diesel fuels or blending components from biomass, part 1: Proof of principle testing. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy, 2012, 31(2): 191-199.
[9] Silveira M H L, Morais A R C, da Costa Lopes A M, et al. Current pretreatment technologies for the development of cellulosic ethanol and biorefineries. ChemSusChem, 2015, 8(20): 3366-3390.
[10] Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hgerdal B. Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: inhibition and detoxification. Bioresource Technology, 2000, 74(1): 17-24.
[11] Field S, Ryden P, Wilson D, et al. Identification of furfural resistant strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Saccharomyces paradoxus from a collection of environmental and industrial isolates. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2015, 8(1): 1-8.
[12] Narendranath N V, Thomas K C, Ingledew W M. Effects of acetic acid and lactic acid on the growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a minimal medium. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol, 2001, 26(3): 171-177.
[13] Li H, Zhang X, Shen Y, et al. Inhibitors and their effects on Saccharomyces cerevisiae and relevant countermeasures in bioprocess of ethanol production from lignocellulose. Chin J Biotech, 2009, 25(9): 1321-1328.
[14] Jonsson L J, Alriksson B, Nilvebrant N O. Bioconversion of lignocellulose: inhibitors and detoxification. Biotechnol Biofuels, 2013, 6(1): 16.
[15] Guo X, Cavka A, Jonsson L J, et al. Comparison of methods for detoxification of spruce hydrolysate for bacterial cellulose production. Microb Cell Fact, 2013, 12: 93.
[16] Nieves L M, Panyon L A, Wang X. Engineering sugar utilization and microbial tolerance toward lignocellulose conversion. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 2015, 3: 17-27.
[17] Zhang M M, Zhao X Q, Cheng C, et al. Improved growth and ethanol fermentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in the presence of acetic acid by overexpression of SET5 and PPR1. Biotechnology Journal, 2015,10(12):1903-1911.
[18] Wallace-Salinas V, Gorwa-Grauslund M F. Adaptive evolution of an industrial strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for combined tolerance to inhibitors and temperature. Biotechnol Biofuels, 2013, 6(1): 151.
[19] Keating J D, Panganiban C, Mansfield S D. Tolerance and adaptation of ethanologenic yeasts to lignocellulosic inhibitory compounds. Biotechnol Bioeng, 2006, 93(6): 1196-1206.
[20] Zha J, Li B Z, Shen M H, et al. Optimization of CDT-1 and XYL1 expression for balanced Co-production of ethanol and xylitol from cellobiose and xylose by engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS One, 2013, 8(7): e68317.
[21] Wang X, Bai X, Chen D F, et al. Increasing proline and myo-inositol improves tolerance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to the mixture of multiple lignocellulose-derived inhibitors. Biotechnol Biofuels, 2015, 8: 142-150.
[22] Li B Z, Yuan Y J. Transcriptome shifts in response to furfural and acetic acid in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 2010, 86(6): 1915-1924.
[23] Strijbis K, Distel B. Intracellular acetyl unit transport in fungal carbon metabolism. Eukaryot Cell, 2010, 9(12): 1809-1815.
[24] Oshoma C E, Greetham D, Louis E J, et al. Screening of non-Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for tolerance to formic acid in bioethanol fermentation. PLoS One, 2015, 10(8): e0135626.
[25] Palmqvist E, Grage H, Meinander N Q, et al. Main and interaction effects of acetic acid, furfural, and p-hydroxybenzoic acid on growth and ethanol productivity of yeasts. Biotechnol Bioeng, 1999, 63(1): 46-55.
[26] Oliva J M, Negro M J, Sáez F, et al. Effects of acetic acid, furfural and catechol combinations on ethanol fermentation of Kluyveromyces marxianus. Process Biochemistry, 2006, 41(5): 1223-1228.
[27] Li B Z, Cheng J S, Qiao B, et al. Genome-wide transcriptional analysis of Saccharomyces cerevisiae during industrial bioethanol fermentation. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol, 2010, 37(1): 43-55.
[28] Martinez A, Rodriguez M E, Wells M L, et al. Detoxification of dilute acid hydrolysates of lignocellulose with lime. Biotechnol Prog, 2001, 17(2): 287-293.
[29] Liu Z L, Slininger P J, Gorsich S W. Enhanced biotransformation of furfural and hydroxymethylfurfural by newly developed ethanologenic yeast strains. Appl Biochem Biotechnol, 2005, 121-124(2): 451-460.
[30] Wallace-Salinas V, Brink D P, Ahren D, et al. Cell periphery-related proteins as major genomic targets behind the adaptive evolution of an industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain to combined heat and hydrolysate stress. BMC Genomics, 2015, 16(1):514.
[31] Heer D, Sauer U. Identification of furfural as a key toxin in lignocellulosic hydrolysates and evolution of a tolerant yeast strain. Microb Biotechnol, 2008, 1(6): 497-506.
[32] Smith J, van Rensburg E, Gorgens J F. Simultaneously improving xylose fermentation and tolerance to lignocellulosic inhibitors through evolutionary engineering of recombinant Saccharomyces cerevisiae harbouring xylose isomerase. BMC Biotechnol, 2014, 14: 41-58.
[33] Casey E, Sedlak M, Ho N W, et al. Effect of acetic acid and pH on the cofermentation of glucose and xylose to ethanol by a genetically engineered strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Yeast Res, 2010, 10(4): 385-393.
[34] Sanchezi Nogue V, Narayanan V, Gorwa-Grauslund M F. Short-term adaptation improves the fermentation performance of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in the presence of acetic acid at low pH. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 2013, 97(16): 7517-7525.
[35] Bellissimi E, van Dijken J P, Pronk J T, et al. Effects of acetic acid on the kinetics of xylose fermentation by an engineered, xylose-isomerase-based Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain. FEMS Yeast Res, 2009, 9(3): 358-364.
[36] Yu Q, Liu J, Zhuang X, et al. Liquid hot water pretreatment of energy grasses and its influence of physico-chemical changes on enzymatic digestibility. Bioresource Technology, 2016, 199: 265-270.
[37] Svanstrom A, Boveri S, Bostrom E, et al. The lactic acid bacteria metabolite phenyllactic acid inhibits both radial growth and sporulation of filamentous fungi. BMC Res Notes, 2013, 6: 464-473.
[38] Liu Z L, Slininger P J, Dien B S, et al. Adaptive response of yeasts to furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and new chemical evidence for HMF conversion to 2,5-bis-hydroxymethylfuran. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol, 2004, 31(8): 345-352.
[39] Yi X, Gu H, Gao Q, et al. Transcriptome analysis of Zymomonas mobilis ZM4 reveals mechanisms of tolerance and detoxification of phenolic aldehyde inhibitors from lignocellulose pretreatment. Biotechnol Biofuels, 2015, 8: 153-168.
[40] Shui Z X, Qin H, Wu B, et al. Adaptive laboratory evolution of ethanologenic Zymomonas mobilis strain tolerant to furfural and acetic acid inhibitors. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2015, 99(13): 5739-5748.
[41] Izmirlioglu G, Demirci A. Enhanced bio-ethanol production from industrial potato waste by statistical medium optimization. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2015, 16(10): 24490.
[42] Qi X, Zha J, Liu G G, et al. Heterologous xylose isomerase pathway and evolutionary engineering improve xylose utilization in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Front Microbiol, 2015, 6: 1165.
[43] Shen M H, Song H, Li B Z, et al. Deletion of D-ribulose-5-phosphate 3-epimerase (RPE1) induces simultaneous utilization of xylose and glucose in xylose-utilizing Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Lett, 2015, 37(5): 1031-1036.
[44] Huang C F, Lin T H, Guo G L, et al. Enhanced ethanol production by fermentation of rice straw hydrolysate without detoxification using a newly adapted strain of Pichia stipitis. Bioresour Technol, 2009, 100(17): 3914-3920.
[45] Martin C, Marcet M, Almazan O, et al. Adaptation of a recombinant xylose-utilizing Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain to a sugarcane bagasse hydrolysate with high content of fermentation inhibitors. Bioresour Technol, 2007, 98(9): 1767-1773.
[46] Bajwa P K, Shireen T, D'Aoust F, et al. Mutants of the pentose-fermenting yeast Pichia stipitis with improved tolerance to inhibitors in hardwood spent sulfite liquor. Biotechnol Bioeng, 2009, 104(5): 892-900.
[47] Tian S, Zhu J, Yang X. Evaluation of an adapted inhibitor-tolerant yeast strain for ethanol production from combined hydrolysate of softwood. Applied Energy, 2011, 88(5): 1792-1796. |
