4.3 Article

Temperature-dependent changes in the microbial storage flora of birch and spruce sawdust

Journal

BIOTECHNOLOGY AND APPLIED BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 58-64

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bab.1153

Keywords

storage flora; sawdust; yeast; bacteria; mold; biocontrol

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas)
  2. thematic research programme Microdrive

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sawdust can be used to make pellets (biofuel) and particle boards and as a potential lignocellulose feedstock in bioethanol production. Microbial activity can affect sawdust quality; hence, we monitored the microbial population in birch- and spruce sawdust after 3 months' storage at various temperatures. Species composition was similar on both materials but was strongly influenced by temperature. Bacteria were present on all materials at all conditions: on birch, 2.8x10(8), 1.1x10(8), and 8.8x10(6), and on spruce, 4.1x10(8), 5.6x10(7), and 1.5x10(8)CFU/g DM, at 2, 20, and 37 degrees C, respectively. Dominant bacteria at 2, 20, and 37 degrees C were Pseudomonas spp. (some Enterobacteriaceae spp. present), Luteibacter rhizovicinus, and Fulvimonas sp., respectively. Pseudomonas spp. were absent at 20 degrees C. Among microfungi, yeasts dominated at 2 degrees C but were absent at 37 degrees C, whereas molds dominated at 20 and 37 degrees C. Common yeasts included Cystofilobasidium capitatum, Cystofilobasidium infirmominiatum, Candida saitoana, Candida oregonensis, and Candida railenensis. Ophiostoma quercus was a common mold at 2 and 20 degrees C, whereas the human pathogens Aspergillus fumigatus and Paecilomyces variotii dominated at 37 degrees C. Attempts to influence the microflora by addition of the biocontrol yeasts, Wickerhamomyces anomalus and Scheffersomyces stipitis, were unsuccessful, as their growth in sawdust was poor to absent.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available