Scinovex

Research article · 2026 · Full text

International Journal of Agriculture and Nutrition

Manganese peroxidase-mediated biological pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for enhanced enzymatic saccharification and bioenergy production

Roberto Hernández-VegaAna Lucía Ramírez-Flores

Volume 8(2) · Pages 127–130 · DOI: 10.33545/26646064.2026.v8.i2b.696 ↗

Research areasBiofuel production and bioconversionLignin and Wood ChemistryEnzyme-mediated dye degradation

↓ Read full-text PDF0 citations

Abstract

Author-written

The recalcitrant lignin barrier in lignocellulosic biomass constitutes the principal impediment to efficient enzymatic saccharification for second-generation bioethanol production, exemplifying the need for effective and environmentally sustainable pretreatment technologies. The present research evaluated the biological pretreatment of five lignocellulosic substrates using crude Manganese Peroxidase (MnP) from Pleurotus djamor and assessed the subsequent improvement in enzymatic saccharification efficiency. Sugarcane bagasse exhibited the highest lignin removal (44.6±3.2%) after 6 weeks of MnP treatment, followed by rice straw (42.8±2.8%), corn stover (38.4±2.6%), wheat straw (36.2±2.4%), and bamboo chips (28.4±2.2%). MnP pretreatment selectively degraded lignin while preserving 82.4-94.2% of cellulose content. Enzymatic saccharification with commercial cellulase yielded 68.4% glucose conversion from MnP-pretreated sugarcane bagasse compared to 24.6% from untreated controls, representing a 2.78-fold improvement. These findings demonstrate the efficacy of P. djamor MnP as a selective biological pretreatment agent for enhancing lignocellulosic biomass utilization in bioenergy applications.

Summary

Source-checked

Plain-language reading of the full paper, prepared with AI and checked against the text. Each point links to the authors' own words.

  1. Why it matters

    • The lignin barrier in lignocellulosic biomass is the main obstacle to efficient enzymatic saccharification, which is necessary for producing second-generation bioethanol. View evidence ↗

      Why it matters

      The lignin barrier in lignocellulosic biomass is the main obstacle to efficient enzymatic saccharification, which is necessary for producing second-generation bioethanol.

      In the paper's own words

      “The recalcitrant lignin barrier in lignocellulosic biomass constitutes the principal impediment to efficient enzymatic saccharification for second-generation bioethanol production”

      Page 1

      Found in: Introduction

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
    • Existing pretreatment methods like dilute acid and steam explosion are effective at disrupting lignin but are energy-intensive and produce chemical waste and inhibitory products. View evidence ↗

      Why it matters

      Existing pretreatment methods like dilute acid and steam explosion are effective at disrupting lignin but are energy-intensive and produce chemical waste and inhibitory products.

      In the paper's own words

      “Current pretreatment technologies, including dilute acid, steam explosion, alkaline, and organosolv processes, achieve effective lignin disruption but generate inhibitory degradation products, require energy-intensive conditions, and produce chemical waste streams”

      Page 1

      Found in: Introduction

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
    • Biological pretreatment using white rot fungi enzymes is a sustainable alternative that works at ambient conditions and selectively degrades lignin without harming cellulose. View evidence ↗

      Why it matters

      Biological pretreatment using white rot fungi enzymes is a sustainable alternative that works at ambient conditions and selectively degrades lignin without harming cellulose.

      In the paper's own words

      “Biological pretreatment using ligninolytic enzymes from white rot fungi offers an environmentally benign alternative that operates under ambient conditions, generates no toxic byproducts, and achieves selective lignin degradation while preserving the cellulose fraction”

      Page 1

      Found in: Introduction

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
  2. What they did

    • The researchers tested five different lignocellulosic substrates: sugarcane bagasse, rice straw, corn stover, wheat straw, and bamboo chips. View evidence ↗

      What they did

      The researchers tested five different lignocellulosic substrates: sugarcane bagasse, rice straw, corn stover, wheat straw, and bamboo chips.

      In the paper's own words

      “Five lignocellulosic substrates were sourced locally: rice straw, corn stover, wheat straw, sugarcane bagasse, and bamboo chips.”

      Page 2

      Found in: Material

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 2 ↗
    • Pretreatment involved 10 g of substrate in 100 mL of MnP extract (68.4 U/mL) with MnSO₄ and sodium malonate at 30°C and pH 4.5, with enzymes replenished weekly for up to 8 weeks. View evidence ↗

      What they did

      Pretreatment involved 10 g of substrate in 100 mL of MnP extract (68.4 U/mL) with MnSO₄ and sodium malonate at 30°C and pH 4.5, with enzymes replenished weekly for up to 8 weeks.

      In the paper's own words

      “Biological pretreatment was conducted in 500 mL flasks containing 10 g substrate, 100 mL MnP extract (68.4 U/mL), 0.5 mM MnSO₄, and 1 mM sodium malonate at pH 4.5, 30°C with weekly enzyme replenishment for up to 8 weeks.”

      Page 2

      Found in: Methods

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 2 ↗
    • Saccharification was performed using Celluclast at 15 FPU/g cellulose loading for 72 hours at 50°C and pH 4.8. View evidence ↗

      What they did

      Saccharification was performed using Celluclast at 15 FPU/g cellulose loading for 72 hours at 50°C and pH 4.8.

      In the paper's own words

      “Enzymatic saccharification of pretreated biomass used Celluclast at 15 FPU/g cellulose loading, 50°C, pH 4.8 for 72 hours.”

      Page 2

      Found in: Methods

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 2 ↗
  3. What they found

    • After 6 weeks of treatment, sugarcane bagasse had the highest lignin removal at 44.6±3.2%, while bamboo chips had the lowest at 28.4±2.2%. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      After 6 weeks of treatment, sugarcane bagasse had the highest lignin removal at 44.6±3.2%, while bamboo chips had the lowest at 28.4±2.2%.

      In the paper's own words

      “Sugarcane bagasse exhibited the highest lignin removal (44.6±3.2%) after 6 weeks of MnP treatment, followed by rice straw (42.8±2.8%), corn stover (38.4±2.6%), wheat straw (36.2±2.4%), and bamboo chips (28.4±2.2%).”

      Page 1

      Found in: Material

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
    • The MnP pretreatment was selective, preserving between 82.4% and 94.2% of the original cellulose content across the substrates. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      The MnP pretreatment was selective, preserving between 82.4% and 94.2% of the original cellulose content across the substrates.

      In the paper's own words

      “MnP pretreatment selectively degraded lignin while preserving 82.4-94.2% of cellulose content.”

      Page 1

      Found in: Introduction

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
    • For sugarcane bagasse, MnP pretreatment increased glucose conversion from 24.6% (untreated) to 68.4%, a 2.78-fold improvement. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      For sugarcane bagasse, MnP pretreatment increased glucose conversion from 24.6% (untreated) to 68.4%, a 2.78-fold improvement.

      In the paper's own words

      “Enzymatic saccharification with commercial cellulase yielded 68.4% glucose conversion from MnP-pretreated sugarcane bagasse compared to 24.6% from untreated controls, representing a 2.78-fold improvement.”

      Page 1

      Found in: Discussion

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 1 ↗
    • The improvement in saccharification was consistent across all substrates, with improvement factors ranging from 2.72 to 2.82. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      The improvement in saccharification was consistent across all substrates, with improvement factors ranging from 2.72 to 2.82.

      In the paper's own words

      “The enzymatic saccharification improvement factors (2.72-2.82) were remarkably consistent across substrates despite varying absolute delignification levels”

      Page 3

      Found in: Discussion

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 3 ↗
    • Lignin removal followed first-order kinetics for the first 4 weeks before reaching a plateau from week 5 onwards. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      Lignin removal followed first-order kinetics for the first 4 weeks before reaching a plateau from week 5 onwards.

      In the paper's own words

      “Time-course analysis showed progressive delignification following first-order kinetics during weeks 1-4, transitioning to a plateau phase from week 5 onward”

      Page 3

      Found in: Discussion

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 3 ↗
    • A preliminary assessment suggests that using P. djamor MnP reduces the carbon footprint of bioethanol production by 35-40% compared to dilute acid pretreatment. View evidence ↗

      What they found

      A preliminary assessment suggests that using P. djamor MnP reduces the carbon footprint of bioethanol production by 35-40% compared to dilute acid pretreatment.

      In the paper's own words

      “Preliminary life-cycle assessment indicates that biological pretreatment with P. djamor MnP reduces the carbon footprint of lignocellulosic bioethanol production by approximately 35-40% compared to dilute acid pretreatment”

      Page 4

      Found in: Carbon footprint analysis

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 4 ↗
  4. What it means

    • The authors conclude that biological pretreatment is a sustainable alternative to traditional thermochemical methods for biomass processing. View evidence ↗

      What it means

      The authors conclude that biological pretreatment is a sustainable alternative to traditional thermochemical methods for biomass processing.

      In the paper's own words

      “These findings support biological pretreatment as a sustainable alternative to thermochemical methods.”

      Page 4

      Found in: Conclusion

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 4 ↗
    • The authors suggest that combining MnP pretreatment with physical methods like ball milling or ultrasonic treatment could further improve lignin removal. View evidence ↗

      What it means

      The authors suggest that combining MnP pretreatment with physical methods like ball milling or ultrasonic treatment could further improve lignin removal.

      In the paper's own words

      “Combination of MnP pretreatment with mild physical methods (ball milling, ultrasonic treatment) could potentially increase the accessible lignin fraction and further enhance delignification efficiency.”

      Page 3

      Found in: Discussion

      Read it in the full textOpen PDF at page 3 ↗

Visual summary

3 visuals

Illustrations explain the paper; charts are replotted from the paper's own table values.

AI-generated illustration
AI-generated conceptual illustration (lignocellulosic biomass fibers and manganese peroxidase enzymes). It explains the idea and does not show study data.↗ Enlarge
Mechanism of Biological Pretreatment
AI-generated conceptual illustration (lignocellulosic biomass fibers and manganese peroxidase enzymes). It explains the idea and does not show study data.

AI-generated conceptual illustration (lignocellulosic biomass fibers and manganese peroxidase enzymes). It explains the idea and does not show study data.

Open full-size image ↗

Mechanism of Biological Pretreatment

AI-generated conceptual illustration (lignocellulosic biomass fibers and manganese peroxidase enzymes). It explains the idea and does not show study data.

View source evidence ↗
Replotted from source data
Replotted from Table 1 (page 2) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.↗ Enlarge
Removal (%): Sugarcane bagasse vs Rice straw vs Corn stover vs Wheat straw vs Bamboo chips
Replotted from Table 1 (page 2) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

Replotted from Table 1 (page 2) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

Open full-size image ↗

Removal (%): Sugarcane bagasse vs Rice straw vs Corn stover vs Wheat straw vs Bamboo chips

Replotted from Table 1 (page 2) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

View source evidence ↗
Replotted from source data
Replotted from Table 2 (page 3) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.↗ Enlarge
Untreated Glucose Yield (%) and Pretreated Glucose Yield (%): Sugarcane bagasse vs Rice straw vs Corn stover vs Wheat straw vs Bamboo chips
Replotted from Table 2 (page 3) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

Replotted from Table 2 (page 3) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

Open full-size image ↗

Untreated Glucose Yield (%) and Pretreated Glucose Yield (%): Sugarcane bagasse vs Rice straw vs Corn stover vs Wheat straw vs Bamboo chips

Replotted from Table 2 (page 3) of the original paper. Every bar is the paper's own table value.

View source evidence ↗

Figures & tables

From the original paper
Compositional analysis of lignocellulosic substrates before and after MnP pretreatmentTable 1Page 2Lignin removal percentages from five lignocellulosic substrates after 6-week MnP pretreatmentFigure 1Page 2Enzymatic saccharification efficiency of MnP-pretreated vs untreated lignocellulosic substratesTable 2Page 3Time-course of lignin and cellulose content during MnP pretreatment of sugarcane bagasseFigure 2Page 3
FULL TEXT Original article · reflowed for reading

Introduction

The development of commercially viable second-generation bioethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass, for example sugarcane bagasse, corn stover, and agricultural crop residues, represents a global priority for sustainable energy transition, yet remains constrained by the recalcitrance of the lignin-hemicellulose matrix that shields cellulose microfibrils from enzymatic hydrolysis [1] . Current pretreatment technologies, including dilute acid, steam explosion, alkaline, and organosolv processes, achieve effective lignin disruption but generate inhibitory degradation products, require energy-intensive conditions, and produce chemical waste streams that increase both production costs and environmental impact [2] . Biological pretreatment using ligninolytic enzymes from white rot fungi offers an environmentally benign alternative that operates under ambient conditions, generates no toxic byproducts, and achieves selective lignin degradation while preserving the cellulose fraction required for subsequent saccharification [3] . Manganese Peroxidase (MnP), through its generation of diffusible Mn³⁺-organic acid chelate oxidants, is particularly effective at cleaving the recalcitrant carbon-carbon and ether bonds within the lignin polymer without the non-selective oxidation of carbohydrate components that characterizes chemical pretreatment methods [4] . The present research was designed to evaluate crude MnP from P. djamor as a biological pretreatment agent for five lignocellulosic biomass substrates, to quantify the selectivity of lignin removal relative to cellulose preservation, and to assess the improvement in Subsequent enzymatic saccharification efficiency achieved through MnP-mediated biological pretreatment [5] .

Material and methods

The pretreatment investigation was conducted at the Department of Bioenergy Research, Mexico City Institute of Renewable Resources, Mexico City, Mexico, from March 2023 to February 2024.

Material

Crude MnP extract (68.4 U/mL) was produced from P. djamor CBS 339.81 under optimized submerged fermentation conditions. Five lignocellulosic substrates were sourced locally: rice straw, corn stover, wheat straw, sugarcane bagasse, and bamboo chips. Substrates were dried, milled to 2 mm particle size, and compositionally analyzed for cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin content by NREL methods. Commercial cellulase (Celluclast 1.5L, Novozymes) was used for saccharification.

Methods

Biological pretreatment was conducted in 500 mL flasks containing 10 g substrate, 100 mL MnP extract (68.4 U/mL), 0.5 mM MnSO₄, and 1 mM sodium malonate at pH 4.5, 30°C with weekly enzyme replenishment for up to 8 weeks. Untreated controls received heat-inactivated enzyme. Lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose content were determined at weekly intervals. Enzymatic saccharification of pretreated biomass used Celluclast at 15 FPU/g cellulose loading, 50°C, pH 4.8 for 72 hours. Glucose release was quantified by DNS assay. Conversion efficiency was calculated as percentage of theoretical maximum glucose yield.

Results

MnP-mediated biological pretreatment achieved selective lignin degradation across all five lignocellulosic substrates, with substrate-dependent variation in delignification efficiency and cellulose preservation.

Discussion

The selective delignification achieved by P. djamor MnP (lignin:cellulose selectivity ratio of 8.4:1 for sugarcane bagasse) substantially exceeds the selectivity of conventional chemical pretreatments including dilute acid (selectivity ~2:1) and alkaline methods (selectivity ~4:1), confirming the fundamental advantage of enzymatic lignin degradation for cellulose preservation [1] . The mechanistic basis for this selectivity resides in the specificity of MnP catalysis for aromatic substrates: the Mn³⁺-organic acid chelate oxidants generated by MnP preferentially abstract electrons from the electron-rich aromatic rings and benzylic positions of lignin substructures while exhibiting minimal reactivity toward the saturated pyranose sugar units of cellulose [2] . The 2.78-fold saccharification improvement for sugarcane bagasse, achieving 68.4% glucose conversion, approaches the commercial viability threshold (typically >70% conversion) and demonstrates that biological pretreatment can deliver saccharification efficiencies comparable to thermochemical methods without the associated energy costs, inhibitor generation, and environmental impact [3] . The consistency of improvement factors across substrates (2.72-2.82) despite varying lignin contents suggests that the improvement is governed by a common mechanism of lignin removal exposing cellulose microfibrils to cellulase access, rather than substrate-specific factors [4] . The plateau in delignification observed after 4-5 weeks indicates that the MnP-accessible lignin fraction (representing approximately 40-45% of total lignin) has been preferentially degraded, while the remaining lignin is either physically inaccessible within the biomass matrix or chemically resistant to the Mn³⁺-mediated oxidation mechanism [5] . Combination of MnP pretreatment with mild physical methods (ball milling, ultrasonic treatment) could potentially increase the accessible lignin fraction and further enhance delignification efficiency.

Biorefinery integration

The MnP-based biological pretreatment integrates naturally into a biorefinery concept where P. djamor cultivation serves the dual purpose of producing the pretreatment enzyme and generating edible mushroom biomass as a coproduct [6] . The economic value of mushroom production could substantially offset enzyme production costs, creating a circular bioprocess in which lignocellulosic agricultural waste is simultaneously valorized through mushroom cultivation and enzymatic pretreatment for bioenergy production.

Carbon footprint analysis

Preliminary life-cycle assessment indicates that biological pretreatment with P. djamor MnP reduces the carbon footprint of lignocellulosic bioethanol production by approximately 35-40% compared to dilute acid pretreatment, primarily through elimination of acid chemical manufacturing emissions, reduced energy consumption for heating, and avoidance of neutralization waste disposal [7] . This environmental advantage strengthens the sustainability credentials of cellulosic bioethanol produced through the biological pretreatment pathway.

Conclusion

The present research identified P. djamor MnP as an effective biological pretreatment agent for lignocellulosic biomass, achieving selective lignin removal (28.4-44.6%) while preserving 82.4-94.2% of cellulose. The subsequent 2.72-2.82 fold improvement in enzymatic saccharification demonstrates practical significance for cellulosic bioethanol production. The highest glucose conversion of 68.4% from pretreated sugarcane bagasse approaches commercial viability thresholds. These findings support biological pretreatment as a sustainable alternative to thermochemical methods. Future priorities include combination pretreatment strategies incorporating mild physical disruption, pilot-scale continuous pretreatment evaluation, and comprehensive techno-economic modeling of the integrated biorefinery concept.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementsThe Mexico City Institute of Renewable Resources provided laboratory infrastructure and biomass processing facilities. Financial support from CONACYT is acknowledged. Dr. Patricia López assisted in compositional analysis.

Figures and tables from the paper

Table 1. Compositional analysis of lignocellulosic substrates before and after MnP pretreatment
SubstrateLignin Before (%)Lignin After (%)Removal (%)Cellulose Retained (%)
Sugarcane bagasse24.8±1.213.7±0.844.692.4
Rice straw18.4±0.810.5±0.642.894.2
Corn stover22.6±1.013.9±0.738.488.6
Wheat straw20.2±0.912.9±0.736.286.8
Bamboo chips28.6±1.420.5±1.028.482.4

Table text extracted from the original PDF; superscript letters are shown inline. The original table image is below.

View original table image
Compositional analysis of lignocellulosic substrates before and after MnP pretreatment↗ Enlarge
Table 1
Compositional analysis of lignocellulosic substrates before and after MnP pretreatment

Compositional analysis of lignocellulosic substrates before and after MnP pretreatment

Open full-size image ↗
Original paper tableSource PDF · page 2 ↗
Figure 1. Lignin removal percentages from five lignocellulosic substrates after 6-week MnP pretreatment
Lignin removal percentages from five lignocellulosic substrates after 6-week MnP pretreatment↗ Enlarge
Figure 1
Lignin removal percentages from five lignocellulosic substrates after 6-week MnP pretreatment

Lignin removal percentages from five lignocellulosic substrates after 6-week MnP pretreatment

Open full-size image ↗
Original paper figureSource PDF · page 2 ↗
Table 2. Enzymatic saccharification efficiency of MnP-pretreated vs untreated lignocellulosic substrates
SubstrateUntreated Glucose Yield (%)Pretreated Glucose Yield (%)Improvement FactorReducing Sugars (G/L)
Sugarcane bagasse24.668.42.7818.4
Rice straw22.862.62.7416.8
Corn stover20.456.82.7814.6
Wheat straw18.652.42.8212.8
Bamboo chips14.238.62.728.4

Table text extracted from the original PDF; superscript letters are shown inline. The original table image is below.

View original table image
Enzymatic saccharification efficiency of MnP-pretreated vs untreated lignocellulosic substrates↗ Enlarge
Table 2
Enzymatic saccharification efficiency of MnP-pretreated vs untreated lignocellulosic substrates

Enzymatic saccharification efficiency of MnP-pretreated vs untreated lignocellulosic substrates

Open full-size image ↗
Original paper tableSource PDF · page 3 ↗
Figure 2. Time-course of lignin and cellulose content during MnP pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse
Time-course of lignin and cellulose content during MnP pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse↗ Enlarge
Figure 2
Time-course of lignin and cellulose content during MnP pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse

Time-course of lignin and cellulose content during MnP pretreatment of sugarcane bagasse

Open full-size image ↗
Original paper figureSource PDF · page 3 ↗

References

14 in the original paper
  1. Asgher M, Bhatti HN, Ashraf M, Legge RL. Biodegradation of industrial pollutants by white-rot fungi. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2008;35(11):13531368.
  2. Hofrichter M. Review: lignin conversion by manganese peroxidase (MnP). Enzyme Microb Technol. 2002;30(4):454-466.
  3. Hatakka A. Lignin-modifying enzymes from selected white-rot fungi. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 1994;13(23):125-135.
  4. Pointing SB. Feasibility of bioremediation by white-rot fungi. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2001;57(1-2):20-33.
  5. Eze CG, Eze MI, Oparaji EH. Screening of conditions for manganese peroxidase production from white-rot fungi (Pleurotus djamor). J Adv Microbiol Res. 2023;4(1):20-25.
  6. Elisashvili V, Kachlishvili E. Physiological regulation of laccase and manganese peroxidase production by white-rot basidiomycetes. J Biotechnol. 2009;144(1):37-42.
  7. Pandey A, Soccol CR, Mitchell D. New developments in solid-state fermentation: bioprocesses and products. Process Biochem. 2000;35(10):1153-1169.
  8. Cohen R, Persky L, Hadar Y. Biotechnological applications and potential of wood-degrading mushrooms. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2002;58(5):582-594.
  9. Wesenberg D, Kyriakides I, Agathos SN. White-rot fungi and their enzymes for the treatment of industrial dye effluents. Biotechnol Adv. 2003;22(1-2):161-187.
  10. Martinez D, Larrondo LF, Putnam N, Gelpke MD, Huang K, Chapman J, et al. Genome sequence of the lignocellulose-degrading fungus Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Nat Biotechnol. 2004;22(6):695-700.
  11. Dashtban M, Schraft H, Syed TA, Qin W. Fungal biodegradation and enzymatic modification of lignin. Int J Biochem Mol Biol. 2010;1(1):36-50.
  12. Giardina P, Faraco V, Pezzella C, Piscitelli A, Vanhulle S, Sannia G. Laccases: a never-ending story. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2010;67(3):369-385.
  13. Camarero S, Sarkar S, Ruiz-Dueñas FJ, Martínez MJ, Martínez ÁT. Description of a versatile peroxidase involved in the natural degradation of lignin. J Biol Chem. 1999;274(15):10324-10330.
  14. Singhania RR, Patel AK, Soccol CR, Pandey A. Recent advances in solid-state fermentation. Biochem Eng J. 2009;44(1):13-18.