Effects of protease and urea on a granular starch hydrolyzing process for corn ethanol production

Cereal Chemistry

Volumn 86, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 319-322

  Wang, Ping ^a   Johnston, David B ^b   Rausch, Kent D ^a   Schmidt, Shelly J ^a   Tumbleson, M E ^a   Singh, Vijay ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b EASTERN REGIONAL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHANOL; GRINDING (MACHINING); HYDROLYSIS; METABOLISM; STARCH;

CORN-ETHANOL; DISTILLERS' DRIED GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES; DRY GRIND PROCESS; ETHANOL CONCENTRATIONS; ETHANOL PRODUCTION; GRANULAR STARCHES; HYDROLYZING ENZYMES; PROCESS ECONOMICS; PROTEIN MATRIX; SAVE ENERGY;

UREA;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 67249125433     PISSN: 00090352     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1094/CCHEM-86-3-0319     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. AACC International. 2000. Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists, 10th Ed. Method 44-19. The Association: St. Paul, MN.
2. Anonymous. 2005. Stragen 001, Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Enzyme for Ethanol Production. Genencor International: Palo Alto, CA.
3. ASABE. 2003. Standard, ANSI/ASAE S319.3. ASABE: St. Joseph, MI.
4. Galvez, A. 2005. Analyzing cold enzyme starch hydrolysis technology in new ethanol plant design. Ethanol Producer Mag. 11:58-60.
5. Ingledew, W. M., and Bellissumi, E. 2007. Yeast food composition for fuel ethanol production. US patent 70,190,628.
6. Johnston, D. B., and Singh, V. 2001. Use of proteases to reduce steep time and SO2 requirements in a corn wet-milling process. Cereal Chem. 78:405-411.
7. Johnston, D. B., Singh, V., and Eckhoff, S. R. 2003. Use of enzymes to reduce steep time and SO2 requirements in a maize wet-milling process. US paten. 6566125.
8. Jones, A. M., and Ingledew, W. M. 1994. Fuel alcohol production: Assessment of selected commercial proteases for very high gravity wheat mash fermentation. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 16:683-687.
9. Kimura, A., and Robyt, J. F. 1995. Reaction of enzymes with starch granules: kinetics and products of the reaction with glucoamylase. Carbohydr. Res. 277:87-88.
10. Lantero, O. J., and Fish, J. J. 1993. Process for producing ethanol. US paten. 5231017.
11. Robertson, G. H., Wong, D. W. S., Lee, C. C., Wagschal, K., Smith, M.R., and Orts, W. J. 2006. Native or raw starch digestion: A key step in energy efficient biorefining of grain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54:353-365.
12. Sarath, G., Zeece, M. G., and Penheiter, A. R. 2001. Protease assay methods. Pages 45-76 in: Proteolytic Enzymes: Practical Approach, 2nd Ed. B. Rob and J. S. Bond, eds. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
13. Thomas, K. C., and Ingledew, W. M. 1990. Fuel alcohol production: effects of free amino nitrogen on fermentation of very-high-gravity wheat mashes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56:2046-2050.
14. USDA. 2007. Average of U.S. farm prices of selected fertilizers. Online at www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Table7.xls. USDA: Washington, DC.
15. Wang, P., Singh, V., Xu, L., Johnston, D. B., Rausch, K. D., and Tumbleson, M. E. 2005. Comparison of enzymatic (E-mill) and conventional dry grind corn processes using a granular starch hydrolyzing enzyme. Cereal Chem. 82:420-424.
16. Wang, P., Singh, V., Xue, H., Johnston, D. B., Rausch, K. D., and Tumbleson, M. E. 2007. Comparison of raw starch hydrolyzing enzyme with conventional liquefaction and saccharification enzymes in dry grind corn processing. Cereal Chem. 84:10-14.