Sambit Dutta, Marianna Krikeli, Hariklia N. Gavala, Ioannis V. Skiadas
{"title":"滴流床生物CO转化的建模与仿真及与CSTR的比较","authors":"Sambit Dutta, Marianna Krikeli, Hariklia N. Gavala, Ioannis V. Skiadas","doi":"10.1016/j.bej.2025.109819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Syngas biomethanation in a trickle bed reactor (TBR) by mixed microbial consortia has reached a technology readiness level of 4–5. Scaling up the TBR requires investigating the operating conditions under which mass transfer or growth kinetics becomes the rate-limiting step. The novelty of the current work is the first-of-its-kind model development that can simulate microbial growth and biofilm formation together with the hydraulic and mass transfer behavior of TBR. The focus is on carboxydotrophic hydrogenogens, which biologically convert CO to CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>, reducing gas phase CO levels. Model validation showed excellent predictive capacity for TBR of different volumes and height-to-diameter ratios. CO conversion efficiency was compared between 5000 ml (packed bed) semi-pilot-scale TBR, 220 ml (packed bed) lab-scale TBR, and 5000 ml (liquid volume) CSTR. Considering suspended growth, the semi-pilot-scale TBR outperformed the lab-scale TBR and CSTR due to a higher volumetric mass transfer coefficient. When biofilm growth was considered for the TBRs, CO conversion efficiency increased 1.03 times and 4 times for the semi-pilot- and lab-scale TBRs, respectively. Notably, the lab-scale TBR, with biofilm growth, surpassed the 22 times higher working volume CSTR. CO conversion efficiency in the lab-scale TBR increased from 23.3 % (suspended growth) to 86.3 % (biofilm growth) due to an increase of microbial cell mass from 0.081 to 0.29 g cells. Finally, simulations at varying liquid recirculation rates and constant gas flow rates for the TBR revealed a threshold at a liquid Reynolds number 35, where mass transfer limitations shift to microbial growth limitations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8766,"journal":{"name":"Biochemical Engineering Journal","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 109819"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modeling and simulation of biological CO conversion in trickle bed reactor and comparison with CSTR\",\"authors\":\"Sambit Dutta, Marianna Krikeli, Hariklia N. Gavala, Ioannis V. Skiadas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bej.2025.109819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Syngas biomethanation in a trickle bed reactor (TBR) by mixed microbial consortia has reached a technology readiness level of 4–5. Scaling up the TBR requires investigating the operating conditions under which mass transfer or growth kinetics becomes the rate-limiting step. The novelty of the current work is the first-of-its-kind model development that can simulate microbial growth and biofilm formation together with the hydraulic and mass transfer behavior of TBR. The focus is on carboxydotrophic hydrogenogens, which biologically convert CO to CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>, reducing gas phase CO levels. Model validation showed excellent predictive capacity for TBR of different volumes and height-to-diameter ratios. CO conversion efficiency was compared between 5000 ml (packed bed) semi-pilot-scale TBR, 220 ml (packed bed) lab-scale TBR, and 5000 ml (liquid volume) CSTR. Considering suspended growth, the semi-pilot-scale TBR outperformed the lab-scale TBR and CSTR due to a higher volumetric mass transfer coefficient. When biofilm growth was considered for the TBRs, CO conversion efficiency increased 1.03 times and 4 times for the semi-pilot- and lab-scale TBRs, respectively. Notably, the lab-scale TBR, with biofilm growth, surpassed the 22 times higher working volume CSTR. CO conversion efficiency in the lab-scale TBR increased from 23.3 % (suspended growth) to 86.3 % (biofilm growth) due to an increase of microbial cell mass from 0.081 to 0.29 g cells. Finally, simulations at varying liquid recirculation rates and constant gas flow rates for the TBR revealed a threshold at a liquid Reynolds number 35, where mass transfer limitations shift to microbial growth limitations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8766,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biochemical Engineering Journal\",\"volume\":\"222 \",\"pages\":\"Article 109819\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biochemical Engineering Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369703X25001937\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemical Engineering Journal","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369703X25001937","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modeling and simulation of biological CO conversion in trickle bed reactor and comparison with CSTR
Syngas biomethanation in a trickle bed reactor (TBR) by mixed microbial consortia has reached a technology readiness level of 4–5. Scaling up the TBR requires investigating the operating conditions under which mass transfer or growth kinetics becomes the rate-limiting step. The novelty of the current work is the first-of-its-kind model development that can simulate microbial growth and biofilm formation together with the hydraulic and mass transfer behavior of TBR. The focus is on carboxydotrophic hydrogenogens, which biologically convert CO to CO2 and H2, reducing gas phase CO levels. Model validation showed excellent predictive capacity for TBR of different volumes and height-to-diameter ratios. CO conversion efficiency was compared between 5000 ml (packed bed) semi-pilot-scale TBR, 220 ml (packed bed) lab-scale TBR, and 5000 ml (liquid volume) CSTR. Considering suspended growth, the semi-pilot-scale TBR outperformed the lab-scale TBR and CSTR due to a higher volumetric mass transfer coefficient. When biofilm growth was considered for the TBRs, CO conversion efficiency increased 1.03 times and 4 times for the semi-pilot- and lab-scale TBRs, respectively. Notably, the lab-scale TBR, with biofilm growth, surpassed the 22 times higher working volume CSTR. CO conversion efficiency in the lab-scale TBR increased from 23.3 % (suspended growth) to 86.3 % (biofilm growth) due to an increase of microbial cell mass from 0.081 to 0.29 g cells. Finally, simulations at varying liquid recirculation rates and constant gas flow rates for the TBR revealed a threshold at a liquid Reynolds number 35, where mass transfer limitations shift to microbial growth limitations.
期刊介绍:
The Biochemical Engineering Journal aims to promote progress in the crucial chemical engineering aspects of the development of biological processes associated with everything from raw materials preparation to product recovery relevant to industries as diverse as medical/healthcare, industrial biotechnology, and environmental biotechnology.
The Journal welcomes full length original research papers, short communications, and review papers* in the following research fields:
Biocatalysis (enzyme or microbial) and biotransformations, including immobilized biocatalyst preparation and kinetics
Biosensors and Biodevices including biofabrication and novel fuel cell development
Bioseparations including scale-up and protein refolding/renaturation
Environmental Bioengineering including bioconversion, bioremediation, and microbial fuel cells
Bioreactor Systems including characterization, optimization and scale-up
Bioresources and Biorefinery Engineering including biomass conversion, biofuels, bioenergy, and optimization
Industrial Biotechnology including specialty chemicals, platform chemicals and neutraceuticals
Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering including bioartificial organs, cell encapsulation, and controlled release
Cell Culture Engineering (plant, animal or insect cells) including viral vectors, monoclonal antibodies, recombinant proteins, vaccines, and secondary metabolites
Cell Therapies and Stem Cells including pluripotent, mesenchymal and hematopoietic stem cells; immunotherapies; tissue-specific differentiation; and cryopreservation
Metabolic Engineering, Systems and Synthetic Biology including OMICS, bioinformatics, in silico biology, and metabolic flux analysis
Protein Engineering including enzyme engineering and directed evolution.