Research Article - (2016) Volume 5, Issue 2

Bioethanol Production Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae with Different Perspectives: Substrates, Growth Variables, Inhibitor Reduction and Immobilization

Bharti Bhadana* and Madhulika Chauhan
Department of Biotechnology, FET, Manav Rachna International University, Faridabad, Haryana, India
*Corresponding Author: Bharti Bhadana, Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Engineering & Technology, Manav Rachna International Universtiy, Faridabad, Haryana, India, Tel: +91 8750717616 Email:


In the transportation sector, the most commonly used biofuel is ‘bioethanol’ to reduce greenhouse gases. Ethanol production at the industrial level is employed by many yeast, bacteria, and fungi. But Saccharomyces Cerevisiae is most employed yeast. Wide range of substrates has been used for ethanol production such as lignocellulose, molasses, sweat sorghum cane extract, starch based substrate and other wastes. Lignocellulosic hydrolysates contain many inhibitors that can be reduced by treatment with activated charcoal and reducing agents, repeated sequential fermentation, over-liming, evaporation, anion exchanger, enzymatic treatment using peroxidase and laccase, and in-situ detoxification with fermenting microbes. Co-culturing of S. Cerevisiae with other microbes is targeted for optimization of ethanol production, short fermentation time, and for reduced process cost. Yeast cell immobilization has been considered as a potential alternative to enhance ethanol productivity. This paper also reviews the effects of various factors on yeast fermentation for ethanol optimization.

Keywords: Bioethanol; S. cerevisiae ; Lignocellulose; Fermentation; immobilization


As the world population and industrialization are increasing, the demand for energy is also increasing. Therefore, the cost of coal, natural gas, and crude oil is increasing. Thus the uncertainty of the fossil fuel and global climate changes have led to renewable energy development. Among biofuels biodiesel, biogas and bioethanol are dominant renewable energy. In the transportation sector, bioethanol is the most commonly used biofuel. Several substrates have been used for ethanol production such as lignocelluloses, starch, and different wastes [1]. Lignocellulosic biomass (LCB) is more preferred for ethanol production because of the two major reasons: a) it does not compete with food, b) it takes care of plant and agricultural residues in environmentally sustainable process [2,3]. Due to high processing cost, cellulosic ethanol production at industrial level is still a challenge. The major reason for the high cost is the consumption of high steam energy for distillation of fermentation broth with the low ethanol titer when LCB is used as feedstock [4]. Higher feedstock price is the second reason for the high cost of ethanol production [5,6]. Ethanol titer can be upgraded by different pretreatment methods that increase cellulosic content in fermentation system [3,7] and hence reduces the cost. Various microorganisms carry out fermentation such as yeast, fungi, and bacteria. But S. cerevisiae is widely studied and used at both household and industrial levels. Ethanol is generated as the main fermentation product of S. cerevisiae . S. cerevisiae is superior to filamentous fungi, bacteria and other yeasts in its various physiological characteristics for ethanol production at industrial level. It can tolerate wide range of pH [8] with acidic pH as optimum [9], which protects contamination. It can also tolerate ethanol better than other ethanol producers [10]. It is also GRAS (generally regarded as safe) for human consumption. This paper reviews trends for ethanol production using S. cerevisiae with different perspectives like substrates, growth variables, inhibitors reduction from hydrolysate and different immobilization techniques.

Substrate for Yeast

Nonfood source acts as the substrate for ethanol production. Various substrates have been used for ethanol production (Table 1).

S. cerevisiae strains Substrate Pretreatment Enzymatic hydrolysis (g/l) Ethanol Produced
TISTR 5596 starch cassava pulp   Amaylase andglucoamylase 9.9
ATCC 26602 Wheat straw H2O2 cellulase 10
SOL/M5 Leaf and stem of Dendratherma Grandiflora   Crude extract from Pleurotus ostreatus 10.64
Baker yeast Sticky coffee husks     13.6
MTCC 174 Rice husks Na OH Crude unprocessed
ATCC 96581 Waste newspaper sodium dodecyl sulphate Cellulase andglucosidase 14.29
RCK-1 newspaper cellulosics   exoglucanase,glucosidase and xylanases with tween 80 and CoCl2 5.64
Y5 Corn stover Steam explosion cellulase 40
TJ14 Microcrystalline
  Commercial cellulase 45
DQ1 Corn stover H2SO4
supplemented with
Cellulase 48
Y5 Corn stover Steam explosion Cellulase and glucodiase 50
DQ1 Corn stover steam explosion Cellulase 55
L2524a Empty palm fruit
bunch fibers
Alkali (NaOH) Cellulase 64.2
var. ellipsoideus Corn meal   Heat stable –amylase and glucoamylase 79.6
ATCC 6508 Sweet potato chips   Amylase and glucomylase 104.3

Table 1: Different Substrates for S. cerevisiae for Ethanol Production at varying Treatment Conditions.

Ethanol production from nonfood sources provide two advantages: a) cost of waste disposal is reduced, b) since wastes are cheap, thus the cost of ethanol production is also reduced.

Reduction of Inhibitors in Hydrolysates

During hydrolysis, various inhibitors are generated that pose hindrances for ethanol production, such as inhibition of cell growth and sugar consumption during yeast cultivation. Such inhibitors arefurfural, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), acetic acid, formic acid, and phenolic compounds etc. Various approaches are being used to solve this problem, such as- a) repeated sequential fermentation so that yeast can adapt the inhibitory chemicals, b) over-liming [10-27], c) anion exchanger [28], d) activated charcoal addition [25], e) treatment with reducing agents [29], f) evaporation [10], g) in-situ detoxification by fermenting microbes [30,31], h) enzymatic treatment with peroxidase and laccase [32], i) membrane extraction [33] and, j) solvent extraction [32]. In biological methods, enzymes or the microorganisms are used to detoxify the inhibitors in co-culture. Sequential co-culturing of S.cerevisiae and Thermoanaerobacter pentosaceus was found to reduce inhibitory compounds and also enhance ethanol production [30]. According to results, T. pentosaceus was able to metabolize furfural and HMF up to 0.5 and 1 g/L, respectively. Phenolic compounds were also detoxified from Trametes versicolor using immobilized laccase [28]. Activated charcoal treatment, neutralization, solvent extraction, ion exchanger and over-liming are chemical treatment methods. Activated charcoal treatment reduces the inhibitors due to their high adsorption capacity and also shorten the fermentation time [26]. Evaporation helps in the reduction of volatile inhibiting compounds in LCB hydrolysates [10]. Over-liming detoxifies the inhibitors by precipitating them at high pH [27]. Precipitation reduces levulinic acid and acetic acid by neutralization chemistry principle.

Factors Affecting Rate of Yeast Fermentation

There are many factors that could affect the rate of yeast fermentation [8], like - a) type of carbohydrate, b) concentration of carbohydrate, c) concentration of salt, d) osmolarity, e) ethanol concentration, f) pH, g) temperature. Optimum temperature for S. cerevisiae is 30-40°C. Higher temperature shorten the exponential phase of yeast cell [8]. At 50°C, ethanol production is considerably reduced due to change in transport system that can increase toxin accumulation in the cell [8]. Optimum pH for S. cerevisiae was found to be 4.0-5.0 [8]. Below 4.0, the incubation period was prolonged and favored the formation of acetic acid and above 5.0, the concentration of ethanol diminished subsequently and it also favored butyric acid production [8]. Thus various parameters affect ethanol production that must be optimized to enhance ethanol productivity.

Immobilization to Improve Ethanol Productivity

Calcium or sodium alginate and agar-agar cubes are commonly used immobilizing agents [7]. Also, several studies have been done to investigate new immobilizing agents that are cheap and easy to use (Table 2). Yeast immobilization enhances ethanol productivity because- a) it reduces risk of contamination [33-35], b) it makes it easy to separate cell mass for the bulk liquid [36-43], c) it reduces production costs [18,36,42], d) biocatalyst can be recycled [43], e) fermentation time can be reduced [7,18], f) cells can be protected from inhibitors [44] g) more ethanol production compared to free cells [7,18,38,35].

S. cerevisiae Strain Substrate Initial sugar (g/l) Residual Sugar Immobilizing materials Ethanol produced Ethanol yield
MTCC 174 Sugar cane Bagasse 50 22 Agar-agar cubes 9.4 0.33
Baker yeast Glucose 100 16 Lyophilized cellulose gel 36.12 0.43
MTCC 174 Sugar cane Bagasse 50 15 Sugar cane bagasse 15.4 0.44
CBS 8066 Glucose 30 0.3 Alginate-chitosan beads 13.37 0.45
CTCRI Mahula flowers 89.75 7.99 Luffa sponge discs 37.2 0.455
Mutant baker Glucose + Sucrose 280 7.21 Sweet sorghum pith 130.12 0.477
TISTR 5048 Sweet sorghum 240 26.69 Corncobs 102.39 0.48
NP 01 Sweet sorghum Juice 240 54.8 Corncobs 90.75 0.49
Baker yeast Cashew apple juice 70.01 3.92 Cashew apple bagasse 36.91 0.49
DTN Sugar beetMolases 130 6.3 Alginate-maize stem ground tissue 60.36 0.493
Saccharomyces cerevisiae var.
Corn mealhydrolysates 176 8.02 Calcium alginate 89.68 0.52
Pakmaya Yeast Company Glucose 120 6.03 Sodium alginate grafted with N-vinyl-
69.68 0.697

Table 2: Enhancement of Ethanol Production using different immobilizing agents.

Conclusion and Future Perspectives

Starch and molasses have been used for ethanol production for long period of time, but they lead to competition for food with respect to land and price. Therefore, LCB is being used to solve such challenges. Ethanol production at industrial level is not successful due to two major reasons- a) low ethanol titer, b) different inhibitors in hydrolysates. Various optimization techniques are being used to enhance ethanol titer. Adsorption with activated charcoal, over liming, treatment with reducing agents, solvent and membrane extractions potentially reduce inhibitors to enhance ethanol titer. Immobilization of yeast cells is another strategy for optimization of production process in less cost manner. Thus lignocellulose pretreatment and fermentation are still an area of research interest. At present, transformation and over-expression of a gene for specific traits (eg cellulase) in yeast can be fruitful to solve challenges such as inability to use ribose and polysaccharide. Hence, an economic process analysis is required for the development of an industrially suitable production strategy to solve our energy crisis by producing more ethanol in a stable way.


  1. Mussatto SI, Dragone G, Guimarães PM, Silva JP, Carneiro LM, et al. (2010) Technological trends, global market, and challenges of bio-ethanol production.BiotechnolAdv 28: 817-830.
  2. B. Gutierrez´-Rivera, K. Waliszewski-Kubiak, O. Carvajal-Zarrabal, and M. G. Aguilar-Uscanga (2012) Conversion efficiency of glucose/xylose mixtures for ethanol production using Sac-charomycescerevisiae ITV01 and Pichiastipitis NRRL Y-7124. J ChemTechnolBiotechnol 87: 263–270.
  3. Ishola MM, Isroi, Taherzadeh MJ (2014) Effect of fungal and phosphoric acid pretreatment on ethanol production from oil palm empty fruit bunches (OPEFB).BioresourTechnol 165: 9-12.
  4. S. Nikolic,´ L. Mojovic,´ A. Djukic´-Vukovic (2013) Possibilities of improving the bioethanol production from cornmeal by yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. ellipsoideus,” in Causes, Impacts and Solutions to Global Warming, I. Dincer, C. O. Colpan, and F. Kadioglu, Eds., pp. 627–642, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2013.
  5. Timilsina GR, Shrestha A (2011) How much hope should we have for biofuels? 36: 2055–2069.
  6. Mathew AK, Crook M, Chaney K, Humphries (2014) Continuous bioethanol production from oilseed rape straw hydrosylate using immobilisedSaccharomyces cerevisiae cells.BioresoTechnol 154: 248–253.
  7. Karagoz P, Ozkan M (2014) Ethanol production from wheat straw by Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Scheffersomycesstipitis co-culture in batch and continuous system.BioresoTechnol 158: 286–293.
  8. Lin Y, Zhang W, Li C, Sakakibara K, Tanaka S, (2012) Factors affecting ethanol fermentation using Saccharomyces cerevisiae BY4742. Biomass and Bioenergy 47:395–401.
  9. Ortiz-Muniz B, Carvajal-Zarrabal O, Torrestiana-Sanchez B, Aguilar-Uscanga MG (2010) Kinetic study on ethanol pro-duction using Saccharomyces cerevisiae ITV-01 yeast isolated from sugar canemolasses. J ChemTechnolBiotechnol 85: 1361–1367.
  10. Prasertwasu S, Khumsupan D, Komolwanich T, Chaisuwan T, Luengnaruemitchai A, et al. (2014) Efficient process for ethanol production from Thai Mission grass (Pennisetumpolystachion). BioresoTechnol 163: 152–159.
  11. Quevedo-Hidalgo B, Monsalve-Mar´in F, Narvaez´-Rincon P (2013) Ethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae using lignocellulosichydrolysate from Chrysanthemum waste degra-dation. World J MicrobiolBiotechnol 29: 459–466.
  12. Park JM, Oh BR, Seo JW (2013) Efficient production of ethanol from empty palm fruit bunch fibers by fed-batch simul-taneoussaccharification and fermentation using Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 170: 1807-1814.
  13. Tian S, Li Y, Wang Z, Yang X (2013) Evaluation of simultane-oussaccharification and ethanol fermentation of undetoxified steam-exploded corn stover by Saccharomyces cerevisiae Y5. Bioenergy Research, 6: 1142-1146.
  14. Shen Y, Guo JS, Chen YP (2012) Application of low-cost algal nitrogen source feeding in fuel ethanol production using high gravity sweet potato medium. Journal of Biotechnology 160: 229–235
  15. Shahsavarani D, Hasegawa D, (2013) Enhanced bio-ethanol production from cellulosic materials by semi-simultaneous saccharification and fermentation using high temperature resistant Saccharomyces cerevisiae TJ14. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering 115: 20–23
  16. Chu D, Zhang J, Bao J (2012) Simultaneous saccharification and ethanol fermentation of corn stover at high temperature and high solids loading by a thermotolerant strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae DQ1. Bioenergy Research 5: 1020–1026.
  17. Singh A, Bajar S, Bishnoi NR (2014) Enzymatic hydrolysis of microwave alkali pretreated rice husk for ethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Scheffersomycesstipitis and their co-culture. Fuel 116: 699-702.
  18. Nikolic S, Mojovic L, Pejin D, Rakin M (2010) Production of bioethanol from corn meal hydrolyzates by free and immobilized cells of Saccharomycescerevisiae var. ellipsoideus. Biomass and Bioenergy 34: 1449-1456.
  19. Kuhad RC, Mehta G, Gupta R, Sharma KK (2010) Fed batch enzymatic saccharification of newspaper cellulosics improves the sugar content in the hydrolysates and eventually the ethanol fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biomass and Bioen-ergy 34: 1189-1194.
  20. Gouvea BM, Torres C, Franca AS, Oliveira LS, Oliveira ES (2009) Feasibility of ethanol production from coffee husks. Biotechnology Letters 31: 1315-1319.
  21. Bi D, Chu D, Zhu P (2011) Utilization of dry distiller’s grain and solubles as nutrient supplement in the simultaneous saccharification and ethanol fermentation at high solids loading of corn stover. Biotechnology Letters 33: 273-276.
  22. Akaracharanya A, Kesornsit J, Leepipatpiboon N, Srino-rakutara T, Kitpreechavanich V, et al. (2011) Evaluation of the waste from cassava starch production as a substrate for ethanol fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Annals of Microbiology 61: 431-436, 2011.
  23. Xin F, Geng A, Chen NL, Gum MJM (2010) Enzy-matic hydrolysis of sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS)—pretreated newspaper for cellulosic ethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Pichia stipites. Applied Biochemistry and Biotech-nology 162: 1052–1064.
  24. Y. Li, K. Gao, S. Tian, S. Zhang, and X. Yang, “Evaluation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Y5 for ethanol production from enzymatic hydrolysate of non-detoxified steam-exploded corn stover,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 102, no. 22, pp. 10548–10552, 2011.
  25. Kim SK, Park DH, Song SH, Wee YJ, Jeong GT (2013) Effect of fermentation inhibitors in the presence and absence of activated charcoal on the growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering 36: 659-666.
  26. Parawira W, Tekere L (2011) Biotechnological strategies to overcome inhibitors in lignocellulose hydrolysates for ethanol production: review. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 31: 20-31.
  27. De Bari I, Cuna D, Di Matteo V, Liuzzi F (2014) Bioethanol production from steam-pretreated corn stover through an isomerase mediated process.N Biotechnol 31: 185-195.
  28. Ludwig D, Amann M, Hirth T, Rupp S, Zibek S (2013) Development and optimization of single and combined detoxification processes to improve the fermentability of lignocellulose hydrolyzates.BioresourTechnol 133: 455-461.
  29. Alriksson B, Cavka A, Jönsson LJ (2011) Improving the fermentability of enzymatic hydrolysates of lignocellulose through chemical in-situ detoxification with reducing agents.BioresourTechnol 102: 1254-1263.
  30. F. Tomas,´ P. Karagoz,¨ D. Karakashev, and I. Angelidaki, “Extreme thermophilic ethanol production from rapeseed straw: using the newly isolated Thermoanaerobacterpentosaceus and combining it with Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a two-step process,” Biotechnology and Bioengineering, vol. 110, no. 6, pp. 1574–1582, 2013.
  31. Taherzadeh MJ, Karimi J (2011) Fermentation inhibitors in ethanol processes and different strategies to reduce their effects. Biofuels 287–311.
  32. Zhu J, Yong Q, Xu Y, Yu S (2011) Detoxification of corn stoverprehydrolyzate by trialkylamine extraction to improve the ethanol production with Pichiastipitis CBS 5776. Bioresource Technology 102: 1663-1668.
  33. D. L. Grzenia, R. W. Dong, H. Jasuja, M. J. Kipper, X. Qian, and S. R. Wickramasinghe, “Conditioning biomass hydrolysates by membrane extraction,” Journal of Membrane Science, vol. 415-416, pp. 75–84, 2012.
  34. Inal M, Yigitoglu M (2011) Production of bioethanol by immo-bilized Saccharomyces cerevisiae onto modified sodium alginate gel,” Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 86: 1548-1554.
  35. Razmovski R, Vucurovi V (2011) Ethanol production from sugar beet molasses by S. cerevisiae entrapped in an alginate-maize stem ground tissue matrix. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 48: 378-385.
  36. Singh A, Sharma P, Saran AK, Singh N, Bishnoi NR (2013) Comparative study on ethanol production from pretreated sugarcane bagasse using immobilized Saccharomyces cerevisiae on various matrices. Renewable Energy 50: 488–493.
  37. Winkelhausen E, Velickova E, Amartey SA, Kuz-manova S (2010) Ethanol production using immobilized Saccha-romycescerevisiae in lyophilized cellulose gel. Applied Biochem-istry and Biotechnology 162: 2214–2220
  38. Behera S, Mohanty RC, Ray RC (2011) Ethanol production from mahula (Madhucalatifolia L.) flowers with immobilized cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in Luffacylindrica L. sponge discs. Applied Energy: 88: 212–215.
  39. Ylitervo P1, Franzén CJ, Taherzadeh MJ (2011) Ethanol production at elevated temperatures using encapsulation of yeast.J Biotechnol 156: 22-29.
  40. Ji H1, Yu J, Zhang X, Tan T (2012) Characteristics of an immobilized yeast cell system using very high gravity for the fermentation of ethanol.ApplBiochemBiotechnol 168: 21-28.
  41. Laopaiboon L, Laopaiboon P (2012) Ethanol production from sweet sorghum juice in repeated-batch fermentation by Sac-charomycescerevisiae immobilized on corncob. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 28: 559–566.
  42. Pacheco AM, Gondim DR, Gonc¸alves LRB (2010) Ethanol production by fermentation using immobilized cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in cashew apple bagasse. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 161: 209–217.
  43. Sembiring KC, Mulyani H, Fitria AI, Dahnum D, Sudiyani (2014) Rice flour and white glutinous rice flour for use on immobilization of yeast cell in ethanol production. Energy Procedia 32: 99–104.
  44. KirdponpattaraS, Phisalaphong M (2013) Bacterial cellulose-alginate composite sponge as a yeast cell carrier for ethanol production. Biochemical Engineering Journal 77: 103– 109, 2013.
Citation: Bhadana B, Chauhan M (2016) Bioethanol Production Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae with Different Perspectives: Substrates, Growth Variables, Inhibitor Reduction and Immobilization. Ferment Technol 5:131.

Copyright: © 2016 Bhadana B, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.