Modeling and optimization of anaerobic codigestion of potato waste and aquatic weed by response surface methodology and artificial neural network coupled genetic algorithm

Bioresource Technology

Volumn 214, Issue , 2016, Pages 386-395

  Jacob, Samuel ^a   Banerjee, Rintu ^a  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (India)

Author keywords

Anaerobic codigestion; Methane; Optimization; Pistia stratiotes; Potato wastes

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; BACKPROPAGATION; GENETIC ALGORITHMS; METHANE; NEURAL NETWORKS; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

ANAEROBIC CO-DIGESTION; CENTRAL COMPOSITE DESIGNS; FEED-FORWARD BACK PROPAGATION; MODELING AND OPTIMIZATION; OPTIMIZATION OF PROCESS PARAMETERS; PISTIA STRATIOTES; RESPONSE SURFACE METHODOLOGY; SUBSTRATE CONCENTRATIONS;

OPTIMIZATION;

ACIDIFICATION; ANOXIC CONDITIONS; AQUATIC PLANT; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BACK PROPAGATION; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); DIGESTIBILITY; GENETIC ALGORITHM; METHANE; OPTIMIZATION; POTATO; SOLID WASTE; SUBSTRATE; WEED;

ACIDIFICATION; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BACK PROPAGATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; GENETIC ALGORITHM; NONHUMAN; POTATO; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD; WASTE; WASTE WATER MANAGEMENT; WEED; WEIGHT; ALGORITHM; ANAEROBIC GROWTH; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AQUATIC SPECIES; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CHEMISTRY; PH; PROCEDURES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; THEORETICAL MODEL;

PISTIA STRATIOTES; SOLANUM TUBEROSUM;

BIOFUEL; VOLATILE FATTY ACID; WASTE;

ALGORITHMS; ANAEROBIOSIS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AQUATIC ORGANISMS; BIOFUELS; BIOTECHNOLOGY; FATTY ACIDS, VOLATILE; HYDROGEN-ION CONCENTRATION; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); PLANT WEEDS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SOLANUM TUBEROSUM; WASTE PRODUCTS;

EID: 84964867256     PISSN: 09608524     EISSN: 18732976     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.04.068     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Abbasi S.A., Nipaney P.C., Panholzer M.B. Biogas production from the aquatic weed Pistia (Pistia stratiotes). Bioresour. Technol. 1991, 37:211-214.
2. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2014. (accessed 06.03.16). http://eands.dacnet.nic.in/latest_2013.htm.
3. Álvarez R., Lidén G. Anaerobic co-digestion of aquatic flora and quinoa with manures from Bolivin Altiplano. Waste Manage. 2008, 28:1933-1940.
4. Bayr S., Ojanperä M., Kaparaju P., Rintala J. Long-term thermophilic mono-digestion of rendering wastes and codigestion with potato pulp. Waste Manage. 2014, 34:1853-1859.
5. Betiku E., Taiwo A.E. Modeling and optimization of bioethanol production from breadfruit starch hydrolyzate vis-à-vis response surface methodology and artificial neural network. Renewable Energy 2015, 74:87-94.
6. Bouallagui H., Touhami Y., Ben Cheikh R., Hamdi M. Bioreactor performance in anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes. Process Biochem. 2005, 40:989-995.
7. Cecchi E., Traverso P.G., Cescon P. Anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste digester performance. Sci. Total Environ. 1986, 56:183-197.
8. Chandra R., Gupta R.S. Effect of pectin on anaerobic digestion of distillery effluent and biomethanogenesis in fed batch reactor. Indian J. Environ. Prot. 1997, 17:19-23.
9. Chowdhry S.D.R., Gupta S.K., Banergy S.K., Chowdhry S.D.R. Evaluation of the potentiality of tree leaves for biogas production. Indian For. 1994, 120:720-728.
10. Desai K.M., Survase S.A., Saudagar P.S., Lele S.S., Singhal R.S. Comparison of artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) in fermentation media optimization: case study of fermentative production of scleroglucan. Biochem. Eng. J. 2008, 41:263-272.
11. Eaton A.D., Clesceri L.S., Greenberg A.E., Franson M.A.H. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater 1998, American Public Health Association (APHA), New Washington, USA. 20th ed.
12. Ge X., Matsumoto T., Keith L., Li Y. Biogas energy production from tropical biomass wastes by anaerobic digestion. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 169:38-44.
13. Ge X., Xu F., Li Y. Solid-state anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass: Recent progress and perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 205:239-249.
14. Jiménez J., Guardia-Puebla Y., Cisneros-Ortiz M.E., Morgan-Sagastume J.M., Guerra G., Noyola A. Optimization of the specific methanogenic activity during the anaerobic codigestion of pig manure and rice straw, using industrial clay residues as inorganic additive. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 259:703-714.
15. Kafle G.K., Bhattarai S., Kim S.H., Chen L. Anaerobic digestion of Chinese cabbage waste silage with swine manure for biogas production: batch and continuous study. Environ. Technol. 2014, 35:2708-2717.
16. Kana E.B.G., Oloke J.K., Lateef A., Adesiyan M.O. Modeling and optimization of biogas production on saw dust and other co-substrates using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. Renewable Energy 2012, 46:276-281.
17. Kim H., Kim J., Shin S.G., Hwang S., Lee C. Continuous fermentation of food waste leachate for the production of volatile fatty acids and potential as a denitrification carbon source. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 207:440-445.
18. Landine R.C., Brown G.J., Cocci A.A., Virara H. Anaerobic treatment of high strength, high solid potato wastes. Agric. Wastes 1983, 7:111-123.
19. Liang S., McDonald A.G. Anaerobic digestion of pre-fermented potato peel wastes for methane production. Waste Manage. 2015, 46:197-200.
20. National Dairy Development Board (NDDB), Dairy Knowledge portal, <> (accessed on 19.10.2014). http://www.dairyknowledge.in/article/potato-waste.
21. Nielfa A., Cano R., Fdz-Polanco Theoretical methane production generated by the co-digestion of organic fraction municipal solid waste and biological sludge. Biotechnol. Rep. 2015, 5:14-21.
22. Nipaney P.C., Panholzer M.B. Influence of temperature on biogas production from Pistia stratiotes. Biol. Wastes 1987, 19:267-274.
23. Pandey S.K., Marwaha R.S., Dinesh Kumar, Singh S.V. Potato processing story: industrial limitations, challenges ahead and vision for the future. Potato J. 2009, 36:1-13.
24. Parawira W., Murto M., Zvauya R., Mattiasson B. Anaerobic batch digestion of solid potato waste alone and in combination with sugar beet leaves. Renewable Energy 2004, 29:1811-1823.
25. Parawira W., Murto M., Read J.S., Mattiasson B. Profile of hydrolases and biogas production during two-stage mesophilic anaerobic digestion of solid potato waste. Process Biochem. 2005, 40:2945-2952.
26. Parsons W.T., Cuthbertson E.G. Noxious Weeds of Australia 2001, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, Australia.
27. Sadasivam S., Manickam A. Biochemical methods 1992, New Age International, New Delhi, India. 2nd ed.
28. Sorensen A.H., Ahring B.K. Measurements of the specific methanogenic activity of anaerobic digestor biomass. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1993, 40:427-431.
29. Soto M., Mendez R., Lema J.M. Methanogenic and non-methanogenic activity tests. Theoretical basis and experimental set up. Water Res. 1993, 27:1361-1376.
30. Veeken A., Kalyuzhnyi S., Scharff H., Hamelers B. Effect of pH and VFA hydrolysis of organic waste. J. Environ. Eng. 2000, 10:76-81.
31. Wang X., Yang G., Li F., Feng Y., Ren G. Response surface optimization of methane potentials in anaerobic codigestion of multiple substrates: dairy, chicken manure and wheat straw. Waste Manage. Res. 2013, 31:60-66.
32. Wang D., Zhao J., Zeng G., Chen Y., Bond P.L., Li X. How does poly(hydroxyalkanoate) affect methane production from the anaerobic digestion of waste-activated sludge?. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49:12253-12262.
33. Wang Q., Sun J., Zhang C., Xie G.J., Zhou X., Qian J., Yang G., Zeng G., Liu Y., Wang D. Polyhydroxyalkanoates in waste activated sludge enhances anaerobic methane production through improving biochemical methane potential instead of hydrolysis rate. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6:19713. 10.1038/srep19713.
34. Weiland P. One and two step anaerobic digestion of solid agro-industrial residues. Water Sci. Technol. 1993, 27:145-151.
35. Yang L., Huang Y., Zhao M., Huang Z., Miao H., Xu Z., Ruan W. Enhancing biogas generation performance from food wastes by high-solids thermophilic anaerobic digestion: Effect of pH adjustment. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2015, 105:153-159.