Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops 981994953X, 9789819949533

Citation preview

Muhammad Aasim · Faheem Shehzad Baloch · Muhammad Azhar Nadeem · Ephrem Habyarimana · Shakeel Ahmad · Gyuhwa Chung   Editors

Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops

Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops

Muhammad Aasim Faheem Shehzad Baloch Muhammad Azhar Nadeem Ephrem Habyarimana Shakeel Ahmad  •  Gyuhwa Chung Editors

Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops

Editors Muhammad Aasim Faculty of Agricultural Sciences & Technology Sivas University of Science and Technology Sivas, Türkiye Muhammad Azhar Nadeem Faculty of Agricultural Sciences & Technology Sivas University of Science and Technology Sivas, Türkiye Shakeel Ahmad Department of Agronomy Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan

Faheem Shehzad Baloch Faculty of Agricultural Sciences & Technology Sivas University of Science and Technology Sivas, Türkiye Ephrem Habyarimana International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) Patancheru, Telangana, India Gyuhwa Chung Department of Biotechnology Chonnam National University Chonnam, Korea (Republic of)

ISBN 978-981-99-4953-3    ISBN 978-981-99-4954-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore Paper in this product is recyclable.

Preface

The primary driver of socioeconomic progress and the advancement of sustainable human living conditions is energy. The need for energy has grown significantly worldwide, with a considerable reliance on fossil fuels, which account for more than 80.0% to supply the demand. The outcome is the depletion of resources and has forced researchers and stakeholders to consider alternative renewable, clean, affordable, and environmentally friendly energy sources like bioenergy. Reducing environmental pollution, boosting socioeconomic benefits, and preventing fuel reservoir depletion are some of the advantages of biofuel. Biofuels can be classified into four different generations. Among them, second-generation biofuels are made from biomass leftovers from various plants and crops, and based on biomass source, they are further classified into three subclasses. Cellulosic or lignocellulosic biomass has been utilized and regarded as an inexpensive, renewable resource without posing a threat to food security. However, the production efficiency of second-generation biofuels is impacted by low yield, high hydrolysis cost, and dependency on more agricultural production. Socioeconomic pressure has compelled researchers to develop novel, environmentally friendly, and economically viable technologies using fresh feedstock for biofuels. The scenario varies by country, and the energy deficit forces these countries to adopt sustainable solutions for biofuel production. A sustainable biofuel energy system can address several environmental problems in addition to producing renewable energy. Sustainable biofuel production is contingent upon several aspects, including but not limited to biomass/feedstock pretreatment, capital costs, process optimization and parameters, product quality, public acceptance, reactor designs, yields, and biofuels availability. Bioenergy crops generally refer to biomass used for biofuel production. The biomass used for bioenergy production consists of vegetative (lignocellulosic biomass) oil, or starch. A large number of plants have been utilized to produce different biofuels like biodiesel and biogas using different technologies. The biofuel industry has made significant scientific and technological strides, but second-generation biofuels are still far behind the rival traditional fossil fuels to fill the gap. There are certain issues related to biofuel production like availability, technology, and cost; the need for new novel technologies to boost the output efficiency of biofuels is highly required. Recent developments in biotechnology have made it possible for scientists and researchers to create novel or alternative modern methods for producing biofuels

v

vi

Preface

for use in sustainable energy production systems. The book entitled Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops is edited by eminent researchers and scholars from different countries and academic backgrounds. The book covers the previous research work and activities on biotechnological and omics approaches with future perspectives. The topics covered in this book can be summarized as follows: bioenergy crops in the perspective of climate change associated with biotechnological and omics approaches, integrated omics techniques and genomics for bioenergy crops, omics approaches for specific crops like sorghum, soybean, and mustard, the potential of cotton stalks for biofuel production, the role of endophytes, and major insects pests affecting the plant biomass yields have also been addressed in this book. We have tried our best to incorporate the latest and modern information related to biotechnological and omics approaches for bioenergy crops. We are sure that scientists, researchers, and graduate students engaged in these kinds of studies will find this book useful and that it will meet the needs of everyone working on this subject. Sivas, Turkey Muhammad Aasim Sivas, TurkeyFaheem Shehzad Baloch Sivas, TurkeyMuhammad Azhar Nadeem Telangana, IndiaEphrem Habyarimana Multan, PakistanShakeel Ahmed Chonnam, Republic of Korea Gyuhwa Chung

Contents

1

 Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change������������������������   1 Waqas Liaqat, Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Celaleddin Barutçular, and Samina Yasmin

2

 Major and Potential Biofuel Crops����������������������������������������������������������  29 Zemran Mustafa, Gizem Deveci, and Kübra Çelik

3

 Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy ������������  47 Ali Hassan, Muhammad Kamran Qureshi, Babar Islam, and Muhammad Tanveer Altaf

4

 Integrated OMIC Approaches for Bioenergy Crops������������������������������  77 Ahmad Mahmood, Muhammad Imran, Muhammad Usman Jamshaid, Umair Riaz, Muhammad Arif, Wazir Ahmed, Tanveer Ul Haq, Muhammad Asif Shahzad, Abd Ur Rehman, Ali Hamed, Hasan Riaz, and Muhammad Arslan Khan

5

 Genomics of Bioenergy Crops������������������������������������������������������������������  85 Bhupendra Prasad and Yajushi Mishra

6

Omics Approaches for Sorghum: Paving the Way to a Resilient and Sustainable Bioenergy Future������������������������������������������������������������������  99 Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Waqas Liaqat, Faheem Shehzad Baloch, Muhammad Azhar Nadeem, Mehmet Bedir, Amjad Ali, and Gönül Cömertpay

7

 Exploring Omics Approaches to Enhance Stress Tolerance in Soybean for Sustainable Bioenergy Production ������������������������������������ 123 Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Waqas Liaqat, Jaweria Iqbal, Mirza Muhammad Ahad Baig, Amjad Ali, Muhammad Azhar Nadeem, and Faheem Shehzad Baloch

8

 Advanced and Sustainable Approaches in Sugarcane Crop Improvements with Reference to Environmental Stresses�������������������� 155 Amjad Ali, Fatih Ölmez, Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Waqas Liaqat, Ummad Ud Din Umar, and Jaweria Iqbal

vii

viii

9

Contents

 Role of Endophytes in the Regulation of Metabolome in Bioenergy Crops ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 183 Muhammad Zain Ul Abdin, Muhammad Sohail, Hasan Riaz, Sohaib Shahid, Muhammad Yasir Khurshid, Ahmad Mahmood, Muhammad Imran, and Ali Hamed

10 Cotton  Stalks: Potential Biofuel Recourses for Sustainable Environment ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 203 Sabeen Rehman Soomro, Salma Naimatullah Soomro, Shayan Syed, Samina Hassan, and Bushra Tabassum 11 Harmful  Insects in Some Biofuel Plants and Their Biology������������������ 235 Pervin Erdoğan 12 Perspective  Use of Mustards in Biofuel Production in Turkey�������������� 257 Fatma Kayaçetin and Khalid Mahmood Khawar 13 Current  Status and Future Prospectus of Bioenergy Crops������������������ 271 Adla Wasi, Sabaha Tahseen, Arishakausar, Ashique Yusuf Bhatt, and Anwar Shahzad

Editors and Contributors

About the Editors Muhammad Aasim  is a Professor at the Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey since 2020. He completed his graduation and masters from Pakistan with honors and received gold medal from BZU, Multan (graduation), and silver medal from UAF (Master). He worked in multinational pesticide companies from 1998 to 2003 in Pakistan. He started his PhD in 2004 and was awarded PhD in 2010 from Ankara University with honor. After completing PhD, he worked as Asst. Prof. from 2011 to 2013 and Assoc. Prof. from 2013 to 2015 at the Department of Biology, Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University, Karaman, Türkiye. He also served at the Department of Biotechnology, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Türkiye as Assoc. Prof. from 2016 to 2020. He is currently engaged in research activities involving plant biotechnology, plant tissue culture, genetic transformation, phytoremediation, stress physiology, plant-based biopesticides, medicinal and aquatic plants, and nanoparticles. He is also working as an active consultant for plant tissue culture labs. He has published 82 SCIE articles, and cumulatively more than 100 International research articles. He is co-editor of 1 book and wrote more than 30 international book chapters since 2018. Currently, he is working on application of artificial intelligence (AI) in plant biotechnology and plant sciences and published research articles in world renowned journals in 2022 and 2023. Currently, his h-index is 24 with more than 1690 citations on Google Scholar.

ix

x

Editors and Contributors

Faheem  Shehzad  Baloch  is working as Professor of plant breeding and genetics at Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey. He received his PhD with a dissertation on “QTL mapping in wheat” from the faculty of agriculture, University of çukurova, Adana, Turkey in 2012 with a joint fellowship of Turkish ministry of education and Turkish scientific and Technological council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK). In 2013, he started to work as assistant professor at Niğde ÖmerHalis Demir University, Niğde Turkey. In 2015, he joined Bolu Abant izzet Baysal Bolu, Turkey as Assistant Professor. In 2018, he was promoted to associate professor in the same institute. In August 2020, he joined Sivas University of Science and Technology as associate professor and is currently working in the same university. Dr. Faheem has more than 9 years of teaching and research experience in plant phenomes, genetics and genomics, biotechnology especially in next-generation sequencing (NGS) and DNA molecular markers in plant genetics for germplasm characterization, identification of genomic regions for traits of agricultural interest, development and validation of molecular markers for their use in marker-assisted selection, and genomic prediction for plant improvement program particularly cereals and legumes and also for developing strategies for preserving this precious germplasm from Türkiye, which is the hot spot of biodiversity for most of agricultural crops and also thousands of endemic species. He led and participated in many projects funded by national and international organizations. He supervised and co-­ supervised MSC, PhD, and post-doc candidates from various countries. He has over 100 publications in the Web of Sciences Database. He has co-edited 6 books and written over 14 book chapters on important aspects of molecular genetics in relation to plant species. He has an extensive array of citations with over 3000 times as per Google Scholar with an h-Index of 30. Dr. Baloch is an active member of various COST action and also serves as Editorial board member of several impacted journals and guest editor for special issues in different journals and also reviewer for more than 55 peer-­ reviewed international journals with more than 121 verified reviews according to WOS.

Editors and Contributors

xi

Muhammad  Azhar  Nadeem  is working as an Associate Professor of plant breeding and genetics at Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkiye. His PhD thesis was entitled “Identification of Genomic Regions for Various Agronomic Traits in Turkish Common Bean Germplasm with Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS).” He is currently engaged in research activities involving genetic diversity assessment, genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for the identification of genomic regions, and their validation through KASP assay for marker-assisted breeding. Dr. Nadeem is focusing to perform GWAS in legumes, especially in common bean and lentil and other legumes to identify genomic regions associated with agronomic, mineral elements, cooking, and quality traits that will be helpful for the biofortification of these crops. He has a good number of publications in world-renowned and prestigious journals. He serves as an editorial board member of several international journals. He has coedited 2 books and written over 10 book chapters on important aspects of molecular genetics in relation to plant species. He has a good number of citations (1584) as per Google Scholar with an h-Index of 18. Ephrem  Habyarimana  is a Principal Scientist at ICRISAT India, leading ICRISAT’s research on sorghum breeding to optimize the breeding program towards the aim of improving sorghum productivity and income generation, particularly for smallholder farmers. He is a PhD in Agricultural Genetics (Tuscia University, Italy), holds a Master’s degrees in Crop Science (Polytechnic University of Marche, Italy) and in Biotechnology Studies (University of Maryland University College, USA), and several other university degrees and training certificates obtained in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Europe. Dr. Habyarimana has documented skills and expertise of more than 25 years in crop science, genetics, and plant breeding with a particular focus on sorghum. He integrates crop breeding with diverse technologies and skills—agroecological and genomic modeling, big data analytics (phenomics, genomics)—in the process of developing sustainable, resilient, cost-effective cultivars friendly to the environment and biodiversity. He has implemented international projects, including lighthouse projects,

xii

Editors and Contributors

supervised MS and PhD students, co-created sorghum varieties, edited books and authored several specialized scientific articles as documented in Scopus, Google Scholar, and ResearchGate. Recognized as an inventor by the European Commission in the fields of exploratory and market-ready DeepTech innovations, he was a finalist in the 2019 European DatSci and AI Awards. Before joining ICRISAT, Dr. Ephrem Habyarimana was Research Scientist and Chief Scientist at CREA Council for Agricultural Research and Economics, the leading Italian research organization dedicated to agriculture, agri-food supply chains, food-science and nutrition, and socio-­economics issues. Shakeel Ahmad  is currently working as Professor of Agronomy, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology (FAST), Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, Pakistan. He did his PhD from the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan. While, PostDoctorate on Crop Modeling and Climate Change from The University of Georgia, USA. He has edited three books; first on cotton (Cotton Production and Uses), second on rice (Modern Techniques of Rice Crop), and third on citrus (Citrus Production). He has also published 200 papers in Impact Factor bearing journals and 150 chapters in peer-reviewed journals and books, respectively. Gyuhwa  Chung  is a distinguished research emeritus professor at the Department of Biotechnology, Chonnam National University, Republic of Korea. He is a renowned ex situ legume germplasm conservationist and holds the largest wild soybean germplasm in the world known as “Chung’s Wild Legume Germplasm Collection.” He is a renowned wild soybean expert and has been very active in wild soybean conservation due to disturbances in agroecological zones in East Asia. He has authored over 150 research/review articles and book chapters. He is holder of several patents and has an extensive array of citations and reads/downloads to his papers. He has coordinated as a PI in over many scientific research and technology projects and has established worldwide collaborations. His interests in the field of biotechnology lies in genetically modified plants, biofuel, the associated risks to biodiversity, environment, and GM food and feed consumers.

Editors and Contributors

xiii

Contributors Muhammad Zain Ul Abdin  Institute of Plant Protection, Multan, Pakistan Wazir Ahmed  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Amjad Ali  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Muhammad  Tanveer  Altaf  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Muhammad  Arif  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-­ University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Arishakausar  Plant Biotechnology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Mirza  Muhammad  Ahad  Baig  Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Faheem  Shehzad  Baloch  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Celaleddin  Barutçular  Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey Mehmet Bedir  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Ashique Yusuf Bhatt  Plant Biotechnology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Kübra Çelik  Graduate Students at Faculty of Agriculture Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Gönül  Cömertpay  Eastern Mediterranean Agricultural Research Institute, Adana, Turkey Gizem  Deveci  Graduate Students at Faculty of Agriculture Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Pervin Erdoğan  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Ali Hamed  Project Officer, ACIAR Pulses Project, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan

xiv

Editors and Contributors

Tanveer Ul Haq  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Ali Hassan  Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Samina Hassan  Department of Botany, Kinnaird College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan Muhammad  Imran  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-­ University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Jaweria Iqbal  Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan Babar Islam  Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Muhammad Usman Jamshaid  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Fatma Kayaçetin  Kalecik Vocational School, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey Muhammad Arslan Khan  Institute of Plant Protection, Multan, Pakistan Khalid  Mahmood  Khawar  Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey Muhammad  Yasir  Khurshid  Department of Agronomy, Engro Fertilizers, Ghotki, Pakistan Waqas  Liaqat  Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey Ahmad  Mahmood  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-­ University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Yajushi Mishra  Department of Microbiology, Career College, Bhopal, India Zemran  Mustafa  Departmen of Plant Production and Technologies, Faculty of Agriculture Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Muhammad  Azhar  Nadeem  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Fatih  Ölmez  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Department of Plant Protection, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Bhupendra Prasad  Department of Microbiology, Career College, Bhopal, India

Editors and Contributors

xv

Muhammad  Kamran  Qureshi  Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Abd  Ur  Rehman  Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, MNS-­ University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Hasan Riaz  Institute of Plant Protection, Multan, Pakistan Umair Riaz  Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Sohaib Shahid  Manager Supply Chain-Biomass and Corn Grain, Packages Group, Lahore, Pakistan Anwar  Shahzad  Plant Biotechnology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Muhammad  Asif  Shahzad  Department of Agronomy, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan Muhammad Sohail  Institute of Plant Protection, Multan, Pakistan Sabeen Rehman Soomro  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Salma  Naimatullah  Soomro  Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey Shayan Syed  Lithuanian Research Institute for Agriculture and Biology, Kėdainiai, Lithuania Bushra  Tabassum  School of Biological Sciences, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan Sabaha  Tahseen  Plant Biotechnology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Ummad  Ud  Din  Umar  Department of Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Adla Wasi  Plant Biotechnology Section, Department of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Samina Yasmin  Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey

1

Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change Waqas Liaqat, Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Celaleddin Barutçular, and Samina Yasmin

Abstract

Since the commencement of the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century, fossil fuels have provided a solution to our energy concerns. However, the globe has experienced an unprecedented and unregulated usage of fossil fuels in the recent decades. We currently rely significantly on fossil fuels to meet our energy needs. It is definitely true that fossil fuels have shaped our world but at the expense of environmental and other risks. The detrimental environmental effects of fossil fuels are increasingly becoming apparent, and the quest for alternative energy sources has started. Bioenergy crops are one such energy source that has the potential to benefit the environment and help to climate change mitigation by substituting for fossil fuels; nevertheless, considerable greenhouse gases (GHG) saving will necessitate significant land-use change globally. The production of biofuels from bioenergy crops with rapid growth and high photosynthetic efficiency is developing as a viable alternative to fossil fuels. Although it is considered that bioenergy crops have a favorable impact on the environment and can contribute significantly to future energy budgets, they cannot be grown on arable land due to environmental, social, and economic constraints. Growing energy crops on marginal lands is a possible alternative. Due to inherent climatic constraints or vulnerability to erosion and other environmental problems, marginal lands are unsuitable for agricultural practices due to low production and profitW. Liaqat (*) · C. Barutçular Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Türkiye M. T. Altaf Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Türkiye S. Yasmin Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Çukurova University, Adana, Türkiye © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_1

1

2

W. Liaqat et al.

ability. Energy crops produced on marginal areas will not only offer cellulosic biomass without competing with food crops but will also help to restore those lands while significantly reducing GHG emissions without jeopardizing food security. Identifying proper cultivation locations, bioenergy crop kinds, and optimal management approaches can be beneficial to the environment and the long-­ term development of bioenergy. Keywords

Greenhouse gases · Fossil fuels · Marginal land · Land-use change

1.1 Introduction The global population is constantly increasing and, with it, the need for energy generation (Khan et al. 2021). The majority of our present energy needs are met by a system that consumes fossil fuels as a feedstock (World Energy Resources 2016). Two major concerns associated with the use of fossil fuels affecting the global environment and the sustainability of the world’s energy production are (i) when used for energy production, fossil fuels emit a significant amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs), contributing to climate change, and (ii) they are regarded as a finite resource, indicating that they will sooner or later be depleted (Höök and Tang 2013). Coal, for instance, emits GHGs such as carbon dioxide, particulate soot, and sulphur-­containing compounds, which contribute to soil acidification. Similarly, nuclear fission-generated electricity necessitates massive infrastructure and has detrimental effects on human health and environment (Gresshoff et  al. 2017). The majority of countries throughout the world continue to rely on traditional fuels as their primary energy source, and the detrimental effects of fossil-fuel combustion have been acknowledged globally, prompting a quest for alternative fuel sources (Yadav et al. 2019). Therefore, it is necessary to examine alternate energy production methods in order to lessen the energy production industry’s reliance on fossil fuels and make it more sustainable and ecologically sound. The global economy heavily depends on petroleum, and as crude oil supplies decline, there is concern about a future without oil. In the current context, when natural resources are being overutilized, there has been a focus on finding alternatives to a nonrenewable, oil-reliant economy, with a greater emphasis on renewable sources of bioenergy (Choudhary et  al. 2020). Petroleum-based fuel is not a long-term solution for meeting energy needs; hence, there is an urgent need to begin the shift from nonrenewable to renewable energy sources, and governments around the world have recognized this need (Choudhary et al. 2020). The governments of the United States, India, and Brazil have established targets to significantly increase the usage of renewable energy sources by considerable reductions in the share of nonrenewable energy sources (Choudhary et al. 2020). Public interest in bioenergy has surged due to its potential use in transportation, power, and heating. In 2010, bioenergy provided roughly 50 exajoule (EJ) or approximately 9% of the total global energy (IEA 2011). Many countries are

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

3

likely to continue to support bioenergy in the future; the European Union is proposing setting a benchmark of 50% of total energy consumption from renewable sources by 2050, which would amount to 39% from biomass if current trends continue (European Commission 2013). Numerous countries have changed their energy fulfillment priorities from nonrenewable to renewable energy sources. Nevertheless, just a few energy sources are environmentally friendly and sustainable. One such prospective alternative with long-term favorable future effects is the utilization of “bioenergy crops” for energy generation (Yadav et al. 2019). The utilization of biomass for bioenergy can help to reduce GHG emissions, ensure energy security, and promote rural development. Biomass can be used to produce a variety of important bioenergy products such as biogas, biodiesel, bioethanol, and biohydrogen (Ozturk et al. 2017). Biomass transformation to biofuels and chemicals has attracted significant attention due to the growing demand for a reliable and environmentally friendly energy supply that can be integrated into the already established fuel system (Shi et al. 2011. Biomass presents certain advantages as an alternative to fossil fuels, as it is regularly produced in large quantities (World energy resources 2016) and is frequently derived from waste, making it inexpensive (Liu and Wu 2016). Bioenergy crops reduce carbon dioxide levels, reduce GHG emissions, minimize soil erosion, enhance soil carbon, and have the potential to generate heat and electricity (Kim et al. 2013). In addition, bioenergy crops also phytoremediate soil contaminated with heavy metals (Barbosa et  al. 2015). The widespread cultivation of bioenergy crops could potentially have a favorable effect on wildlife. The concept of bioenergy crops is getting popular in the scientific community due to its renewability and eco-friendliness. Finally, biomass is a carbon-neutral renewable resource. The demand for biomass and biofuels is projected to triple by 2035 as a result of their eco-friendly and sustainable properties (Matzenberger et al. 2015). Meanwhile, bioenergy crops are more commonly used as food in the global market, raising food security concerns for their energy utilization. Furthermore, bioenergy crops compete for agricultural land, water resources, and nutrient requirements with food crops. Another adverse effect of bioenergy crop usage is the degradation of wildlife habitat and the spread of exotic plant species (Dipti and Priyanka 2013). In this chapter, the role of bioenergy crops in the background of climate change has been discussed, and also, various potential bioenergy crops to be utilized for bioenergy production have been descibed.

1.2 Fossil Fuels and Global Climate Change The increased reliance on fossil fuels for energy production over the last century has been a key contribution to the rise in atmospheric concentrations of GHGs such as CO2, CH4, N2O, and others that trap energy in the atmosphere and warm the globe, causing global warming. Climate patterns alter as a result of global warming. Since preindustrial times, the average surface temperature of the earth has raised by around 1.1 °C (2 °F), primarily as a result of fossil-fuel emissions (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Global warming of 1.5 °C (https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/)).

4

W. Liaqat et al.

In recent years, billions of tons of CO2 and much more than 120 million metric tons of CH4, the two primary GHGs, have been released into the atmosphere annually as a result of the extraction and combustion of fossil fuels for transportation and energy (Tollefson 2022). Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels have increased dramatically over the last 70  years, approaching 35 billion metric tons of CO2 released in 2020 in comparison to only 5 billion metric tons in 1950 (Global Carbon Project 2022). Around 70% of total worldwide GHG emissions are in the form of CO2 from the consumption of fossil fuels (Olivier et al. 2017), and the key alternatives on the table to drastically reduce their contribution to global warming are (i) to leave the fossil fuels in the ground, (ii) to apply carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, and, of course, (iii) a combination of these (Johnsson et  al. 2019). Some of the necessary reductions in fossil-fuel emissions may be offset by negative emissions through bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS), direct air capture, and afforestation (Johnsson et al. 2019). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has determined that immediate actions are necessary to keep global warming to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) over preindustrial levels and to mitigate the most severe impacts (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Global warming of 1.5 °C (https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/)). Although renewable energy sources have expanded rapidly during the past decade, fossil fuels continue to account for approximately 80% of worldwide energy demand (EPIA 2014; GWEC 2017). At the same time, vast amounts of fossil fuels particularly coal remain undiscovered. To lessen the negative environmental impacts of fossil fuels, a dramatic change in the usage of these fuels as well as more investment in alternatives to these fuels particularly renewables will be required. Some of the negative effects of fossil fuels are shown in Fig. 1.1.

1.3 Mitigating Climate Change via Bioenergy Crops Bioenergy, in broad terms, refers to the delivery of heat, power, or transportation fuels from a wide portfolio of biomass feedstocks processed using a variety of conversion technologies with great potential for GHG emission reductions when compared to fossil fuels (Creutzig et  al. 2015). In response to the implementation of renewable energy mandates, the global usage of biomass for energy production has expanded quickly, particularly in the United States and Europe (110th Congress of the United States 2007). These mandates were designed to improve domestic energy security and to lessen transportation’s climate change consequences by limiting dependency on fossil fuels. Reduction of GHG emissions is one of the primary motivations for the establishment of biofuel production policies by many nations across the world. Biofuel crops can minimize or offset GHG emissions by directly absorbing CO2 during their growth and depositing it in soil and crop biomass (Röder and Welfle 2019). The reductions in GHG emissions from biofuels relative to fossil fuels vary by feedstock and conversion technology. Differences in potential advantages for GHG mitigation among species have become a popular subject of debate both in scientific literature and policy decisions addressing the implication of

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

5

Fig. 1.1  Disadvantages related to fossil-fuel consumption

bioenergy crops (EPA 2010; Davis et al. 2012). The GHG emissions of a bioenergy production system are influenced by species selection and a variety of management considerations that can help or hinder the crop’s ability to reduce GHG emissions. For instance, fertilization requirements can be a significant predictor of GHG emissions in the form of N2O (Smeets et al. 2009). In addition, certain plants naturally have a greater capacity than others to store soil organic carbon (SOC) (Davis et al. 2012). Likewise, in annual cropping systems, the decision between conventional tillage and minimum tillage influences the quantity of fossil-fuel energy consumed in farm operations as well as the production potential (i.e., yield) and the amount of SOC retained (Olchin et al. 2008). In addition to producing biofuels, several bioenergy crops provide byproducts such as press cake or animal feed, so conserving energy that would have been required to produce animal feed by other ways. In contrast to fossil fuels, which emit carbon that has been deposited underground for thousands of years, biofuels are deemed carbon neutral since the carbon they emit during the biomass burning process was trapped from the atmosphere during their growth (FAO 2008). Similarly, biofuel generation from biomass waste or perennial grasses grown on degraded or marginal agricultural areas results in low or no carbon debt and provides long-term GHG benefits (Fargione et al. 2008). As an alternative to fossil fuels, biomass crops and bioenergy production have the capability to reduce global warming. The alternative not only means that less “old” carbon is emitted into the environment, but the underground biomass of perennial biomass crops also serves as a carbon sink. For instance, the potential of Miscanthus giganteus to fix carbon dioxide is assessed to be 5.2–7.2 t C/ha/year, resulting in a negative carbon balance in which more carbon dioxide is fixed than released (Clifton-Brown et  al. 2007). Only poplar and

6

W. Liaqat et al.

switchgrass showed a negative carbon balance (2  t C/ha/year carbon fixing) in a study of maize, switchgrass, soybean, alfalfa, hybrid poplar, and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) (Adler et al. 2007). Based on their benefits, bioenergy crops can play its role in a plausible way in mitigating the negative impacts of climate change on global environment.

1.4 Positive Impacts of Bioenergy Crops on Environment Bioenergy crops have multiple advantages for both the environment and humans (Boehmel et al. 2008) (Fig. 1.2). Carbon sequestration involves the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by plants. Bioenergy crops reduce atmospheric CO2 levels by accumulating a lot of biomass. Many studies (Fu et al. 2014; Dunn et al. 2013; Wang et al. 2012) have shown that the net CO2 emissions from the direct use of biofuels are significantly lower than those from the use of fossil fuels. Perennial crops as bioenergy crops have the capability to enhance soil quality by boosting carbon sequestration through substantial biomass production and extensive root systems (Ma et al. 2000). Consequently, bioenergy crops could be utilized to trap atmospheric CO2 and increase biomass productivity for bioenergy

Fig. 1.2  Benefits of using biofuels as a source of energy

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

7

production (Lemus and Lal 2005). Because of their perennial nature, they are resilient to pests and diseases and require little or no insecticide application (Finckh 2008). Bioenergy plants have enriched phenotypic, physiological, biochemical, and architectural characters which are desirable traits in biofuel production (Yadav et al. 2019). Furthermore, bioenergy crops are more resistant to abiotic and biotic challenges and grow more quickly than other crops. Bioenergy crops need less biological, physical, or chemical pretreatments, lowering the cost of biomass processing. Different bioenergy technologies have different advantages and disadvantages from an agricultural and ecological point of view (Tilman et al. 2006). Switchgrass, for example, is a perennial feedstock that can assist to reduce soil erosion, improve water quality, and preserve natural diversity (Samson et  al. 2005). Additionally, perennial biomass feedstock complements food and feed-based agriculture rather than competing with it. In comparison to fossil fuels, biofuels (such as ethanol) can be less hazardous to human health and emit fewer GHGs (Chum et al. 2015). Biodiversity is an important indication of food production and ecological services (Qin et al. 2018). The effect of biofuel generation on biodiversity is largely dependent upon the type of bioenergy generation system, underlying land-use condition, and landscape architecture (Correa et al. 2017). Land-use conversion represents the most essential component influencing biological abundance since it involves a direct change in land-use condition and production system, which is also affected by type of plant and planting location. It has been stated, for example, that direct replacement of grassland by many biofuel crops could boost local productivity and sustain ecological functioning due to a shift in production system (Correa et  al. 2017; Sang and Zhu 2011). Moreover, studies have shown that cultivating Miscanthus has a much lower detrimental impact on biodiversity than producing annual crops, owing to perennial cultivations providing relatively constant habitats for wildlife (Werling et  al. 2014). Similarly, cultivating bioenergy crops on low-­ productive or marginal areas can enhance landscape design, and better management methods can lower the likelihood of biodiversity loss at specific locations, though further research is needed (Manning et al. 2014). Biomass feedstocks planted on degraded land can mitigate or reverse land degradation by enhancing soil fertility, elevating soil organic carbon, and eliminating pollutants like heavy metals (Don et  al. 2012; Robertson et  al. 2018). The particular consequences, however, are dependent on the initial land conditions, type of feedstock, and management techniques (Davis et al. 2013). The incorporation of perennial grasses and woody crops into conventional annual crops can improve soil carbon sequestration, reduce soil erosion, and minimize dryland salinity (Busch 2017; Landis et  al. 2018). There exists an immediate need to bring in new high-yielding energy crops to meet energy demands while also protecting the environment, which might be accomplished through global screening of productive botanical species.

8

W. Liaqat et al.

1.5 Land-Use Change and Bioenergy Crops Rapid growth in the generation of biofuel-based feedstocks has resulted in significant changes in land usage around the world, and this trend is expected to continue in the coming years. According to the US Department of Energy, 611 million hectares of pastureland and cropland may be substituted by devoted bioenergy crops, producing approximately 150,380 Tg of bio-feedstock (U.S. Department of Energy 2011). The International Energy Agency estimated that by the year 2030, the world would need an additional 3554 million hectares of land to accommodate the expected increase in biofuel production. This represents 2.5–3.8% of globally accessible arable land (IEA 2006). According to land-use analysis models, the increase of bioenergy crop production has primarily resulted in a decline in natural forests and pastureland globally, and this trend is anticipated to continue in the future (Gurgel et al. 2007). Although it is believed that bioenergy production and accompanying land-use change contribute to fewer carbon emissions when compared to fossil fuels yet, bioenergy is not totally clean (Herbert and Krishnan 2016). While switching from annual to perennial bioenergy crops is projected to improve soil carbon, replacement of forests can lead to significant GHG emissions. Land-use change caused by biofuels can occur either directly through the cultivation of perennial bio-feedstocks on nonagricultural lands or indirectly through the displacement of existing farmland (Bertzky et al. 2011). Conversion of current cropland to biofuel crops may also result in agricultural intensification due to the use of new technologies and management practices to meet global food demand. This type of land intensification comprises switching from a rotation of corn and soybean to a continuous corn crop in order to raise the amount of maize produced for use in biofuel production (Ale et al. 2019). Although land intensification minimizes land conversion, the increasing use of agricultural inputs and employment of intensive production techniques can have major consequences in terms of nutrient loss, soil health deterioration, higher GHG emissions, and biodiversity loss. Utilizing marginal or underutilized agricultural land for biofuel production is one way to alleviate the stress on current croplands, whereas, in the long run, technological developments will be critical for increasing yields and mitigating the effects of bioenergy crops on land-use change. According to a modeling study conducted by Searchinger et al. (2008), tropical countries such as China, Brazil, and India are likely to see significant land-use shifts to meet the need for food and feed as a result of the diversion of US maize cropland for production of biofuel. The rise in agricultural land use to meet biofuel production targets has also been observed in Africa and Latin America as a result of biofuel-related policies implemented in Canada, the European Union, and the United States (Banse et al. 2008). Considerable shifts in indirect land uses prompted the United States and the European Union to adopt regulations that consider the hazards of indirect land-use change (iLUC) (SSI 2016). Nonetheless, assessing iLUC risks and quantifying associated GHG emissions remain a big challenge because they are essentially indistinguishable and involve complicated global markets that are geographically isolated (Ale et al. 2019).

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

9

1.6 Potential Bioenergy Crops 1.6.1 Maize Maize (Zea mays) is an essential feedstock crop owing to its highgrain yield and faster rate of starch accumulation in grains (Mabee et al. 2011). It is a preferred crop for bioconversion due to its high proportion of volatiles and simple conversion method. Maize is used to produce ethanol in the United States and other countries. It has emerged as a viable option for biofuel generation since its photosynthetic activity is carried out via the C4 pathway. Because of this, maize is able to achieve highly efficient carbon fixation and water usage, in addition to efficient utilization of nutrients (Ragauskas et al. 2006). Maize is distinct among C4 grasses due to its vast and diversified germplasm for crop improvement and its capacity to adapt to many environments. Currently, it is necessary to evaluate the advantages of maize hybrids as a substitute for corn grain for effective ethanol production (Choudhary et al. 2020). In contrast to starch, which is the only carbon form that can be harvested from maize grain, maize can also produce three unique types of biomass feedstocks, i.e., starch, sugar, and lignocellulosic biomass (Choudhary et al. 2020). Maize, especially tropical maize, has approximately 2.5 times more the total annual biomass compared to maize grain and a higher fuel conversion efficiency (White et al. 2011). Thus, the growing bioenergy industry requires tropical maize as a biorefinery feedstock because it acts as a dual purpose feedstock, serving as a sugar feedstock that can replace sugarcane in temperate areas and as a lignocellulose feedstock that can replace corn grain-based ethanol production. Maize has the potential to offer a wide variety of products. Starch-based ethanol production setups or facilities can serve as platforms for cellulose-based ethanol production, assisting in the early stages of expanding the lignocellulose-based economy (Choudhary et al. 2020). The greatest constraint of maize feedstock, however, is its principal use as a staple food in numerous countries. The usage of maize in the production of biofuels could increase global food costs, leading to poverty and hunger. To address the issue, sweet corn variety was produced by spontaneous recessive mutations in genes regulating sugars to starch in the corn kernel’s endosperm (Yadav et  al. 2019). The development of dual-purpose and photosynthetically competent sweet corn hybrids could let farmers contribute to energy generation while minimizing environmental and food supply impacts (Takamizawa et al. 2010). Maize is an excellent model organism for understanding complicated cell wall features and establishing the path for maize breeders working on biofuel processing. Maize has enormous potential to act as a sustainable second-generation feedstock for the production of bioenergy due to current genomic developments like cell wall functional genomics, protein engineering, as well as genetic interventions such as quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping (Choudhary et al. 2020).

10

W. Liaqat et al.

1.6.2 Sweet Sorghum Sweet sorghum is an extensively cultivated sugar crop with bioenergy generation potential. It accumulates a substantial amount of fermented sugars in its stems in order to produce higher biomass. This plant needs lesser fertilizers and hence can be easily cultivated on marginal lands. Sweet sorghum could be produced at a lower cost than maize while providing greater energy advantages. When compared to maize and many other common energy crops, sweet sorghum has the potential to produce more ethanol per unit of land area (Regassa and Wortmann 2014). Because of the rising interest in the conversion of biomass to energy as well as its wider adaptation to drought, saline, alkaline, and water logging conditions, this crop is one of the promising candidates in the search for efficient bioenergy crops (Rao et al. 2009). Furthermore, this crop has a shorter growth season and requires less water than maize, sugarcane, sugar beet, and wheat (Dar et al. 2018). Aside from these benefits, it minimizes the food versus fuel conflict by meeting the diverse needs of food, fodder, and fuel. It is becoming increasingly important as an energy crop and possesses a high nitrogen-use efficiency. It accumulated a higher amount of sugar in the stem during water shortage (Harris et al. 2007). Crops of sweet sorghum and Sorghum can be crossbred for increased crop productivity, and desired traits could be identified by genetic mapping (Swaminathan et  al. 2010). The very effective photosynthetic system (i.e., C4 pathway) and effective nutrient utilization of sweet sorghum make it a promising bioenergy crop. Under warmer temperatures, it matures early representing that it is a climate-resilient crop. This crop is known as a crop of four “Fs,” i.e., it can be grown for food, fuel, fodder, and fiber (Umakanth et al. 2019). It is not only recognized as a “high-energy crop” owing to its high photosynthetic rate; however, it is also known as “the camel among crops” due to its drought resilience. Its tolerance to various abiotic stresses such as drought (Tesso et  al. 2005), water logging, and salinity (Zegada-Lizarazu and Monti 2012) and wider adaptation (Reddy et al. 2008) along with higher water, nitrogen, and radiation use efficiencies make it a preferred biofuel feedstock over other crops such as maize, sugarcane, and sugar beet (Umakanth et al. 2019). Since water availability is projected to become a key constraint for agricultural production in the coming years, sweet sorghum is a viable option because it requires minimum water and inputs. Bioethanol produced from sweet sorghum can help preserve dwindling fossil-fuel reserves and reduce GHG emissions. If the crop is used to produce ethanol (from sugar and grains) and green electricity (from excess bagasse), 3500 L of crude oil equivalents can be saved per hectare of land (Umakanth et  al. 2019). If both ethanol from the juice and food from grains are produced, 2300 L crude oil equivalents can be saved per hectare of cultivated area (Umakanth et al. 2019). The energy gained from sweet sorghum is significantly greater than the energy used in its production. According to the USDA, maize ethanol will produce 1.3–1.8 British thermal units (Btu) of energy for every Btu of fossil energy consumed in production, while sweet sorghum ethanol can produce 12–16  Btu for every Btu used (https://www.uky.edu/Ag/CCD/introsheets/sorghumbiofuel.pdf). In various regions of the world, this crop can also be used as a feedstock for the

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

11

production of sugar, syrup, animal feed, bedding, roofing, paper, and fencing (Laopaiboon et al. 2007; Liu et al. 2008). The juice containing glucose, fructose, and sucrose is appropriate for direct fermentation to ethanol (Sipos et al. 2009) or for synthesis of other biobased chemicals (Ou et al. 2016). Additionally, the leaves, bagasse, and grain of the crop can be used to make biofuels or as animal feed. Bagasse can be utilized to generate heat or power, or it can also be used to produce useful byproducts such as pulp and particle board (Somani and Taylor 2003). When utilized as animal feed, bagasse from sweet sorghum has a better biological value than bagasse from sugarcane because it is rich in minerals and micronutrients (Kumar et al. 2010). Besides ethanol, additional fermentation products that can be obtained include butanol, acetone, butyric acid, lactic acid, hydrogen, and methane (Umakanth et al. 2019). Sweet sorghum also produces various potential native products including cellulose for papermaking, proteins, waxes, and allelopathic chemicals like sorgoleone (Whitfield et  al. 2012). Genetic and molecular characterization of sorghum traits received fewer research efforts than maize and sugarcane (Yadav et al. 2019). Sweet sorghum can serve as a model bioenergy crop for studying the complicated genomes of other bioenergy crops like maize, sugarcane, Miscanthus, and switchgrass (Paterson et al. 2009). The harvesting season and the need to transport and store significant quantities of sweet sorghum are two of the biggest obstacles to its use as a bioenergy source. To avoid sugar loss, the extracted juice must be fermented as soon as possible after harvest. Wu et al. (2008) observed a 20% loss of fermentable sugars after preserving fresh juice at room temperature for around 3 days and a 50% loss after storing juice for 1 week. The harvest window for sweet sorghum in temperate climates is limited by the duration of the growing season (Regassa and Wortmann 2014). Likewise, low seed yield and often tall plants make seed production costly.

1.6.3 Sugarcane Sugarcane is an important crop in the world’s tropical and subtropical regions. In warm temperate and tropical regions, sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) is the most important sugar-producing plant. About 100 countries worldwide cultivate sugarcane to meet the world’s sugar demand, making it one of the most widely produced agricultural commodities (Negrao et  al. 2021). It is a perennial crop that grows throughout the year, and thus, its feedstock is readily available throughout the year and at much lower prices than competing bioenergy crops (Yuan et al. 2008). Sugarcane is primarily produced for the production of sugars from sugarcane juice. Sugarcane juice is rich in sucrose which is a substrate for the production of biofuel. A number of breeding programs are now underway with the goal of improving sugarcane germplasm in order to increase both sucrose production and cellulosic biomass (Negrao et al. 2021). Bioethanol is manufactured commercially from molasses which is a byproduct of the sugar industry (Khan et al. 2017). Sugarcane, in addition to producing sugar, is also one of the most reliable source of biofuels since it

12

W. Liaqat et al.

possesses the greatest number of the essential features required for a bioenergy crop. Sugarcane is one of the most efficient photosynthesizers (as it has C4 photosynthetic pathway which is the most efficient photosynthetic system) and sucrose producers, since it has the highest output-to-input ratio for biofuel production. The effectiveness of bioenergy crops to absorb and transform solar energy into chemical energy is largely determined by physiological parameters associated with photosynthetic capacity. This species is renowned for its extraordinary potential to photoassimilate sucrose and store very high dry matter content. The dry matter of the cane includes sucrose, cellulose, lignin, and fiber. Industrial sugarcane stalks account for 80–85% of the total biomass (Hatti-Kaul et  al. 2007). Bagasse, the byproduct of sugar production, has gained significant importance as a steam source for sugar mills. It is also utilized in the food industry to make organic chemicals and paper. In addition, with the advancement of technology, bagasse is now used to generate power (Khan et al. 2017). Sugarcane plays a significant role in the energy sector of the countries, and its contribution is likely to grow even more in the years ahead. Cane biofuels can aid in reducing air pollution and GHG emissions. Additionally, cane biofuels improve the performance of engines (Matsuoka et al. 2015). Sugarcane may produce up to 17 barrels of oil for every barrel of oil produced by soybean, the other primary crop considered for biofuel production (Negrao et al. 2021). In controlled settings, sugarcane may produce more than 200 tons of fresh weight per hectare, but the theoretical maximum output of this crop is projected to be 381 t/ha and thus is considered an efficient biomass producer (Waclawovsky et al. 2010). The bioethanol yield of using only bagasse can be up to 3000 L of ethanol per hectare; however, using both bagasse and sugar for ethanol production can yield 9950  L ethanol per hectare (Somerville et al. 2010). Additionally, energy cane can produce several times more bioethanol per hectare (Somerville et al. 2010). Sugarcane production is both carbon efficient and sustainable for ethanol generation. Sugarcane ethanol has significant potential for CO2 reduction (Tammisola 2010). Meanwhile, the automated harvesting technology, the lack of requirements for prime agricultural areas in some countries, and the previously existing sugar industry make sugarcane one of the better bioenergy candidates (Khan et al. 2017). Sugarcane also satisfies one of the primary concerns about biofuel crops, namely, food security, because it harvests a large amount of biomass, supplying lignocellulosic materials—a possible source of second-generation biofuels that do not have an influence on food production. According to the aforementioned evidences, sugarcane has the potential to become one of the most prosperous energy crops.

1.6.4 Hemp Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) has a long history of human knowledge and has been used for a range of purposes, including fibers for textiles and building composites, its seed as a source of food and essential oil, and secondary metabolites derived from hemp for therapeutic applications (Linger et  al. 2002). The hemp plant

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

13

contains numerous harvestable components that can be utilized in a variety of ways. Aside from the established applications of hemp for oil, fiber, and nutraceutical items, one prospective application of industrial hemp is the production of biofuels (Das et al. 2017). Industrial hemp is regarded as a significant bioenergy feedstock due to its high biomass and energy yields when compared to other biomass feedstocks like cereal grains (Danielewicz and Surma-Ślusarska 2017; Branca et  al. 2017). Because of its low lignin and high cellulose content, industrial hemp offers a strong potential for bioethanol production (Kuglarz et al. 2014). This potential is maximized for the plant when it is harvested when its growth is nearly at its peak, resulting in the best glucose conversion rate (Tutt et al. 2013). Previously, ethanol generation from industrial hemp was studied utilizing a combined dilute acid/stream pretreatment approach (Kuglarz et al. 2014). Pretreatment with 1% sulfuric acid (at 180 °C for 10 min) resulted in the maximum glucose yield, i.e., 73–74%, and ethanol yield, i.e., 75–79% (0.38–0.40 g-ethanol/g-glucose) (Kuglarz et al. 2014). Using an alkali pretreatment, the bioethanol production for certain hemp cultivars can reach as high as 96.69%, in comparison to a maximum of 89.6% using an acid pretreatment (Zhao et al. 2020). A significant advantage of hemp is that it produces substantial biomass yields with comparatively modest water input (Ranalli and Venturi 2004). Hemp requires less water than several other crops, including alfalfa and corn (Ranalli and Venturi 2004). Another factor influencing hemp development is ambient temperature; the ideal temperature range for growing hemp is 13–22 °C; however, growth outside of that range is still possible (Fortenbery and Bennett 2004). Hemp has natural resistance to pests and disease; thus, only a little amount of biocides are needed during its production (Prade 2011). Because of these features, hemp is quite inexpensive to grow. Additionally, hemp can be utilized in the production of biohydrogen (Cheng et al. 2011). A Canadian study investigated the feasibility of using hemp residue as a feedstock for biohydrogen and bioethanol production (Agbor et al. 2014). The study found that after removing the hemicelluloses, lignin, wax, and pectins from the hemp residue, there was cellulose left that may be used as a feedstock for biohydrogen and bioethanol production (Agbor et  al. 2014). Through the process of steam reforming, hemp bio-oil could also be utilized to produce biohydrogen (Bizkarra et al. 2019). Hemp’s features of more biomass, low feedstock cost, high in carbohydrates, and comparitively low in lignin make it an environmentally friendly and renewable choice for the production of bioenergy (van der Werf 2004; Li et  al. 2010a). Therefore, biofuel derived from hemp can help lessen our reliance on fossil fuels. This renewable feedstock can assist any country in lowering its energy import expenses and ensuring long-term energy supplies (Rehman et al. 2013). According to Das et al. (2017), industrial hemp is a potential species for the biofuel production and value-added products. Likewise, Li et  al. (2010a) reported that hemp can be utilized to produce solid fuel, bioethanol, biohydrogen, biogas, and biodiesel. Hemp is grown to produce bioenergy in western countries including Ireland (Rice 2008), Finland (Sankari 2000), Poland (Burczyk et al. 2008), Spain (Casas and Rieradevall 2005), Latvia (Balodis et al. 2011), and the United States. For centuries, the oil extracted from hemp seeds has been used as a fuel in lamps. Moreover, because of its ability to thrive on heavy

14

W. Liaqat et al.

metal-­contaminated soil, this crop has shown potential in heavy metal bioremediation, in addition to biofuel production (Kyzas et al. 2015).

1.6.5 Jerusalem Artichoke Jerusalem artichoke (JA) (Helianthus tuberosus L.) has a wide range of adaptations and is typically found in marginal environments (Pimsaen et al. 2010). Its tubers and stalks have high inulin content and have the potential to produce ethanol for use as a biofuel (Rossini et al. 2019). While this species has received a lot of attention due to its physiological characteristics, agronomical and breeding practices are in the early stages (Kays and Nottingham 2007). This species is known to be very polymorphous, and because of its tolerance to a wide range of environments, agronomic approaches have received little attention (Kays and Nottingham 2007). It is a multipurpose crop that is grown for human consumption (as tubers or to produce sweets), medicinal purposes, biomass, and bioenergy (like bioethanol and biogas) production (Ma et al. 2011a). In addition, like other Asteraceae plants such as safflower and chicory, this plant has the potential to be used as a fodder crop (Danieli et al. 2011). The features which make this crop a potential bionergy crop include its high carbohydrate content, rapid growth, and significant total dry matter per unit area (Baldini et al. 2006), capacity to use waste water with high nutrients (Rebora et al. 2011), resistance to pathogen, and capability to grow easily with less production costs (Monti et al. 2005) and on marginal lands (Kays and Nottingham 2007). This crop has a great potential to be used as an energy crop owing to its capacity to thrive under a variety of climatic conditions with minimal water and chemical inputs, which is predicted to provide long-term economic and environmental benefits (Rossini et al. 2019). Additionally, JA has the benefit that every part of the plant can be exploited for the generation of biomass. A recent research evaluated JA as a viable feedstock for producing various bio-based products (e.g., ethanol, biodiesel, 2,3-butanediol, lactic acid, etc.) utilizing advancements in biorefinery technology (Qiu et al. 2018). Because its useful biomass includes stems, leaves, and flowers, in addition to tubers, JA has a significant potential for bioenergy production in biorefineries (Sawicka et al. 2020). It is also a worthy source of biomass to produce solid fuels (aerial biomass) (Mehmood et al. 2019), biogas and bioethanol (aerial biomass and tubers), and bioproducts (aerial biomass and tubers) (Oleszek et al. 2019).

1.6.6 Switchgrass Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) is a potential lignocellulosic energy crop with a high potential for bioethanol generation. It is a temperate North American perennial grass that has been examined as a biofuel crop in the United States, Europe, Canada, and China (Adler et al. 2006; Ameen et al. 2019). Switchgrass is a warm-season, photosensitive, deep-rooted, C4-type metabolism plant that quickly adapts to soils in various geographical regions (including marginal lands); produces high yields;

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

15

has a low incidence of diseases and pests, low soil erosion, and low water and nutrient needs; and has a high potential for bioethanol production (Keshwani and Cheng 2009; Siri-Prieto 2012). With a maximum height of 2.5 m, the crop can produce leaves of 30–90 cm in length (Larnaudie et al. 2022). It has a significant potential for ethanol production due to its high glucose content (mostly as glucan), and its low ash content is beneficial for producing energy when burned in a combustion chamber (Keshwani and Cheng 2009). In addition to ethanol, other bioproducts that can be extracted from switchgrass are acetic acid, butanol, enzymes, carotenoids, syngas, polyhydroxyalkanoates, poly-(butylene succinate) composites, acetone, hydrogen, isoprenol, bio-oils, xylitol, isopentenol, and biochars (Wang et al. 2016, 2018; Irmak et  al. 2018). Switchgrass is a lignocellulosic biomass particularly developed and grown for the production of ethanol and can be regarded as a promising sustainable nonfood feedstock (Larnaudie et al. 2022). Switchgrass can be cultivated on marginal lands and still produce large amounts of biomass, offering farmers with a novel source of income while also providing environmental benefits (Gelfand et al. 2013). This crop is recognized for its adaptability to a wide variety of environments and soil types, and it has been successfully established outside of its origins as long as the new environment was similar to the one from which it was collected and developed (Casler et al. 2015). Moreover, it is anticipated that switchgrass will adapt well to changing climatic conditions due to its physiological capacity to adjust to elevated CO2 levels and high temperatures (Ma et al. 2011b). Switchgrass may provide extra advantages due to its capacity to store carbon in plant tissues and soil through its root biomass. In fact, carbon emissions from switchgrass combustion are typically balanced by the amount of carbon sequestered (Missaoui et al. 2005). Switchgrass is grown in the United States for pasture, soil conservation, hay production, and as biomass for energy production (Casler 2012). Because it requires fewer nutrients and water for growth, this grass is an eco-friendly crop that can be used for the production of large quantities of biofuel. However, switchgrass needs approximately 2 years to become established (McLaughlin and Kszos 2005). The scientific community has paid less attention to this plant, particularly in the area of plant breeding (Bouton and Wood 2012).

1.6.7 Cardoon Cynara cardunculus L. is a perennial plant native to the Mediterranean region and belongs to the Asteraceae family (Gostin and Waisundara 2019). Cynara cardunculus L., also known as cardoon or artichoke thistle, is a complex species that includes three botanical varieties, i.e., cultivated cardoon (var. altilis DC.), globe artichoke (var. scolymus (L.) Fiori), and wild cardoon (var. sylvestris (Lamk) Fiori) (Pesce and Mauromicale 2019). The by-products of cardoon are mainly comprised of stems, leaves, and seeds. They have been utilized to produce biomass for energy, as well as edible oil, animal feed, and biodiesel (Ierna and Mauromicale 2010). Due to their high bioactive compound contents like cynarin and silymarin, the leaves have been used in traditional medicine (Petropoulos et al. 2019; Wahba et al. 2016). The

16

W. Liaqat et al.

cultivation of this crop in large areas is gaining attention as a potential feedstock for industrial bio-based products like conversion into biopolymers, or it can be used as a source of cellulose for its application in nanometric technology (Pires et al. 2019). Cardoon crops are able to grow in unfavorable conditions, and they have been recognized as potential energy crops (Mauromicale et al. 2014). The by-products of cardoon are primarily used to generate biomass for a variety of applications. Cardoon crops are of great interest in the industrial production of seed oil, paper pulp, solid biofuel, green forage, biodiesel, and pharmaceutically active compounds (Vergara et al. 2018; Petropoulos et al. 2018). Mauromicale et al. (2014) investigated the potential energy production ability of wild and cultivated cardoons in terms of biomass, achenes, and energy yield. The results revealed that both wild and cultivated cardoons are potential energy crops and enhanced soil fertility by maximizing nitrogen, exchangeable potassium, available phosphorus content, and organic matter. Several authors (Pesce et al. 2017; Raccuia and Melilli 2007; Cravero et al. 2012) investigated cardoon for biomass production and determined that it can be cultivated as an energy crop. The results revealed that the aboveground dry biomass yield of cardoon increased continuously throughout the seasons and that the low yield in the first season may have been due to establishment difficulties, particularly under low-input management in extremely dry conditions. Cardoon solid biofuel is typically used for power generation and heating (Oliveira et al. 2012). This is primarily due to the biomass features, which include high productivity in harsh climate conditions, low moisture content, and a high lignocellulose content (Fernández et al. 2006). Numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate the properties of cardoon as a solid biofuel (Fernández et al. 2006; Gominho et al. 2018). Biomass of cardoon can also be utilized to make seed oil and biodiesel, which can then be used for human nutrition and to make biodiesel (Fernández et al. 2006). Cardoon flower produces a fruit that acts as a dispersal unit and is commonly referred to as seeds. This is a characteristic shared by cardoon and sunflower because they are members from the same botanical family, i.e., Asteraceae (Curt et al. 2002; Pesce et al. 2017). Despite making up a small portion of the biomass, seeds have been extensively researched because of their significant bioactive properties and potential for energy use (Fernández et al. 2006; Petropoulos et al. 2018, 2019). The seeds are also high in protein (30.4/100 g dry weight) and fat (23.7/100 g dry weight), which contributes to their nutritional value (Petropoulos et  al. 2019). Cardoon seed oil has an impressive lipid profile, with 4% stearic, 25% oleic, 11% palmitic, and 60% linoleic fatty acids on average (Petropoulos et al. 2019). Additionally, cardoon oil can be utilized in food application and to produce biodiesel (Fernández et  al. 2006; Petropoulos et al. 2019, 2018).

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

17

1.7 Bioenergy Crops and Marginal Lands In general, marginal lands are described as unproductive or inappropriate for crop production because of poor soil properties, poor quality underground water, undesirable topology, drought, and unfavorable climatic conditions; consequently, conventional food crops have no or little potential for profitability (Mehmood et  al. 2017). However, the degree of marginality remains unknown and difficult to estimate because of its strong reliance on context and purpose. Maginal land consists of contaminated land, barren agriculture land due to inappropriate conditions for crop production (Smith et  al. 2013), brownfields (Smith et  al. 2013), degraded lands (Tilman et al. 2006), or dump sites used to dispose off waste (Nixon et al. 2001). Even though bioenergy is one of the cleanest and most renewable energy sources currently available, it faces a number of obstacles. For instance, Brazil, China, and the United States need billions of liters of liquid fuels per year, which cannot be met without heavy biomass produced using arable lands (10% of the total area of the world). This is impractical because lowered cropland will result in higher food prices (Runge and Senauer 2007), followed by expansion of cropland elsewhere, resulting in deforestation and heavy GHG emissions (Searchinger et al. 2008). To avoid the negative competition between food and fuels, marginal lands with the potential to produce bioenergy feedstocks have received considerable attention (Mehmood et al. 2017). Utilizing marginal lands to produce cellulosic feedstocks might potentially avoid several issues associated with cropland-based biofuel production (Skevas et al. 2014). According to the prevailing global scenario, key challenges to address include balancing food and energy provision, biodiversity conservation, environmental protection, and ecosystem functions (Mehmood et al. 2017). Utilizing marginal lands to cultivate energy crops could therefore be a feasible alternative without causing additional food and environmental issues (Qin et  al. 2011) depending upon the availability and selection of appropriate energy crop (Lord 2015). Moreover, it is determined that utilizing marginal lands for producing energy crops can improve the biodiversity too (Werling et al. 2014). It is estimated that bioenergy crops developed sustainably on marginal or nonarable lands could meet the global energy demand in the 2030 reference scenario (Skevas et al. 2014). Several plant species have demonstrated the potential to be utilized as bioenergy crops depending on their suitability to the prevailing climatic and geographical conditions (Li et al. 2010b). The selected crops as bioenergy feedstock may provide the whole aboveground biomass, rather than just the harvested fruits (like Jatropha), whereas grasses like Miscanthus and switchgrass may be preferred for growing on marginal lands due to their ability to develop on poor soils (where food crops are not profitable) due to lesser nutrient requirements and improved water use efficiencies (Fargione et  al. 2010; Sang and Zhu 2011). Some bioenergy crops that could be sucessfully grown on marginal lands are enlisted in Table 1.1.

18

W. Liaqat et al.

Table 1.1  Bioenergy crops suitable for marginal lands Energy crops Cup plant (Silphium perfoliatum L.) Miscanthus (Miscanthus spp.) Giant reed (Arundo donax L.) Wheat grass Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus obliqua) Sweet sorghum Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) Sida hermaphrodita Cardoon (Cynara cardunculus) Agave spp. Willow

Potential features High carbohydrate, phenolic acid, and oil Higher ethanol and biomass yield, require less water and nutrients Better yield, resistant to drought, potential bioenergy feedstock Higher nutrient use efficiency, minimum cost of production Source of phenolic compounds and essential oils, fast growth, low ash content Less nutrient requirements, higly tolerant to abiotic stresses, higher sugar content Phytoremediation, drought tolerant, tolerant to lower temperature Phytoremediation, ethanol and biogas production, tolerant to drought and flooding Tolerant to lower tempeature, require less water and nutrients Tolerant to higher temperature and drought Highly water use efficient, highly drought tolerant, best for alcohol production Low nutrient requirement, high biomass production, biofuel production

1.8 Future of Bioenergy Crops Energy crop cultivation to create alternative transportation fuels is a viable solution in the face of rising fuel demand, shrinking available lands, and food versus fuel competition. The utilization of marginal areas to cultivate perennial grasses for energy purposes increases energy and food security by reducing reliance on sugar crops and edible oil as well as providing various environmental benefits. Furthermore, it allows marginal landowners to improve their living conditions by transforming barren fields into more valuable ones by cultivating bioenergy crops. Bioenergy’s future depend on innovative technology. The relevance of basic research on processes and genes involved in plant development, cell wall biosynthesis, and metabolite production, on the other hand should not be overlooked (Yuan et al. 2008). The application of “omics” techniques will aid in the investigation of proteins, genes, and metabolites from various tissues and developmental stages in order to correlate the characteristics and structures of cell walls with desirable genes for guiding future gene discovery and biotechnology-based feedstock enhancements. Furthermore, bioenergy is not and should not be confined to higher plants, despite the fact that higher plants are expected to be the most important feedstock for firstand second-generation biofuels. The study of microorganisms with the ability to breakdown plant cell walls should also be an integral part of bioenergy research (Shoseyov et al. 2003). Moreover, due to their rapid growth, green algae should be

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

19

evaluated as a possible feedstock (Sims et al. 2006). Bioenergy research is growing as an area rich in opportunities to reshape human society’s energy source. Future considerations should include the development of renewable energy systems based on advanced technology, synthetic biology, and good environmental stewardship. In the future, huge biomass production on degraded soils with limited available water would necessitate genetically modified energy crops, such as the incorporation of the CAM pathway into C3 crops. Furthermore, we must have a better understanding of the environmental impact of widespread production of energy crops on marginal areas around the world. If high yields can be maintained, bioenergy from plants, particularly perennial grasses and trees, could make a considerable contribution to addressing global issues such as climate change and energy security. There is no single solution to address rising fuel demand. In order to fuel the future of humanity in a cost-effective and sustainable manner, cross-disciplinary approaches including the use of modeling, GIS, simulation, and the study of the impact of large-scale biomass production on the environment, soil properties, and biodiversity are the questions that should be addressed in the future through purpose-driven and cumulative research efforts (Mehmood et al. 2017).

1.9 Conclusion Optimal land use is one of our generation’s worldwide concerns, as we seek to get a wide range of services from the land including food, feed, fiber, fuel, etc., while also maintaining biodiversity and minimizing further environmental damage (United Nations 2015; UNCCD 2017). Simultaneously, if we are to keep temperature below 2 °C, it will be necessary to implement a vast array of climate change mitigation measures on a worldwide scale (Smith et  al. 2016). In this scenario, bioenergy fits well as a potential strategy for mitigating climate change, which necessitates massive worldwide land-use change. The cultivation of bioenergy crops in marginal areas can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and play a significant role in the production of biofuels. Future research must validate the results of feedstock production on marginal areas in order to prevent displacement of existing crops and maximize the advantages of large-scale bioenergy deployment in a global context. Bioenergy crop biomass can play a significant role in biodiesel and ethanol production, elevating the rural economy while improving energy efficiency and productivity by utilizing environmentally degraded lands. Even though bioenergy production can have negative effects on the surrounding environment, including water quantity and quality, biodiversity, GHG emissions, soil erosion, and and soil organic carbon, the negative environmental impacts are highly dependent on management practices, plant type, and land source. Identifying the ideal cultivation locations, improved management techniques, and bioenergy crop varieties can be advantageous for both bioenergy production and the environment. It is not conceivable to totally replace the present fossil-fuel business with the biofuel industry. However, due to the rising population, environmental degradation, fuel consumption, and the food versus fuel

20

W. Liaqat et al.

and fossil-fuel versus biofuel debates need to be seriously considered at the global scale.

References Adler PR, Grosso SJD, Parton WJ (2007) Life-cycle assessment of net greenhouse-gas flux for bioenergy cropping systems. Ecol Appl 17(3):675–691 Adler PR, Sanderson MA, Boateng AA, Weimer PJ, Jung HJG (2006) Biomass yield and biofuel quality of switchgrass harvested in fall or spring. Agron J 98(6):1518–1525 Agbor V, Zurzolo F, Blunt W, Dartiailh C, Cicek N, Sparling R, Levin DB (2014) Single-step fermentation of agricultural hemp residues for hydrogen and ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy 64:62–69 Ale S, Femeena PV, Mehan S, Cibin R (2019) Environmental impacts of bioenergy crop production and benefits of multifunctional bioenergy systems. In: Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Academic Press, pp 195–217 Ameen A, Tang C, Liu J, Han L, Xie GH (2019) Switchgrass as forage and biofuel feedstock: effect of nitrogen fertilization rate on the quality of biomass harvested in late summer and early fall. Field Crop Res 235:154–162 110th Congress of the United States (2007) Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ140/PLAW-­110publ140.pdf Baldini M, Danuso F, Monti A, Amaducci MT, Stevanato P, De Mastro G (2006) Chicory and Jerusalem artichoke productivity in different areas of Italy, in relation to water availability and time of harvest. Ital J Agron 1(2):291–308 Balodis O, Bartuševics J, Gaile Z (2011) Biomass yield of different plants for biogass production. In: Environment. Technologies. Resources. Proceedings of the international scientific and practical conference, vol. 1, pp 238–245 Banse M, van Meijl H, Tabeau A, Woltjer G (2008) Will EU biofuel policies affect global agricultural markets? Eur Rev Agric Econ 35(2):117–141 Barbosa B, Boléo S, Sidella S et  al (2015) Phytoremediation of heavy metal-contaminated soils using the perennial energy crops Miscanthus spp. and Arundo donax L. Bioenergy Res 8:1500–1511 Bertzky M, Kapos V, Scharlemann JP (2011) Indirect land use change from biofuel production: implications for biodiversity. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bizkarra K, Barrio VL, Gartzia-Rivero L, Bañuelos J, López-Arbeloa I, Cambra JF (2019) Hydrogen production from a model bio-oil/bio-glycerol mixture through steam reforming using Zeolite L supported catalysts. Int J Hydrog Energy 44(3):1492–1504 Boehmel C, Lewandowski I, Claupein W (2008) Comparing annual and perennial energy cropping systems with different management intensities. Agric Syst 96(1–3):224–236 Bouton JH, Wood DT (2012) U.S.  Patent No. 8,319,009. U.S.  Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC. Branca C, Di Blasi C, Galgano A (2017) Experimental analysis about the exploitation of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa) in pyrolysis. Fuel Process Technol 162:20–29 Burczyk H, Grabowska L, Kołodziej J, Strybe M (2008) Industrial hemp as a raw material for energy production. J Ind Hemp 13(1):37–48 Busch G (2017) A spatial explicit scenario method to support participative regional land-use decisions regarding economic and ecological options of short rotation coppice (SRC) for renewable energy production on arable land: case study application for the Göttingen district, Germany. Energy Sustaina Soc 7:1–23 Casas XA, Rieradevall J (2005) Environmental analysis of the energy use of hemp–analysis of the comparative life cycle: diesel oil vs. hemp–diesel. Int J Agric Resour Gov Ecol 4(2):133–139

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

21

Casler MD (2012) Switchgrass breeding, genetics, and genomics. In: Switchgrass: a valuable biomass crop for energy, pp 29–53. Casler MD, Vogel KP, Harrison M (2015) Switchgrass germplasm resources. Crop Sci 55(6):2463–2478 Cheng CL, Lo YC, Lee KS, Lee DJ, Lin CY, Chang JS (2011) Biohydrogen production from lignocellulosic feedstock. Bioresour Technol 102(18):8514–8523 Choudhary M, Singh A, Gupta M, Rakshit S (2020) Enabling technologies for utilization of maize as a bioenergy feedstock. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 14(2):402–416 Chum HL, Nigro F, McCormick R et al (2015) Conversion technologies for biofuels and their use. Bioenergy & sustainability: bridging the gaps 72:374–467 Clifton-Brown JC, Breuer J, Jones MB (2007) Carbon mitigation by the energy crop, miscanthus. Glob Change Biol 13(11):2296–2307 Correa DF, Beyer HL, Possingham HP, Thomas-Hall SR, Schenk PM (2017) Biodiversity impacts of bioenergy production: microalgae vs. first generation biofuels. Renew Sust Energ Rev 74:1131–1146 Cravero V, Martin E, Crippa I, Anido FL, García SM, Cointry E (2012) Fresh biomass production and partitioning of aboveground growth in the three botanical varieties of Cynara cardunculus L. Ind Crop Prod 37(1):253–258 Creutzig F, Ravindranath NH, Berndes G et al (2015) Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment. GCB Bioenergy 7(5):916–944 Curt MD, Sánchez G, Fernández J (2002) The potential of Cynara cardunculus L. for seed oil production in a perennial cultivation system. Biomass Bioenergy 23(1):33–46 Danielewicz D, Surma-Ślusarska B (2017) Properties and fibre characterisation of bleached hemp, birch and pine pulps: a comparison. Cellulose 24(11):5173–5186 Danieli PP, Primi R, Ronchi B, Ruggeri R, Rossini F, Del Puglia S, Cereti CF (2011) The potential role of spineless safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L. var. inermis) as fodder crop in Central Italy. Ital J Agron 6(1):e4–e4 Dar RA, Dar EA, Kaur A, Phutela UG (2018) Sweet sorghum-a promising alternative feedstock for biofuel production. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:4070–4090 Das L, Liu E, Saeed A et al (2017) Industrial hemp as a potential bioenergy crop in comparison with kenaf, switchgrass and biomass sorghum. Bioresour Technol 244:641–649 Davis SC, Boddey RM, Alves BJ et al (2013) Management swing potential for bioenergy crops. GCB Bioenergy 5(6):623–638 Davis SC, Parton WJ, Grosso SJD, Keough C, Marx E, Adler PR, DeLucia EH (2012) Impact of second-generation biofuel agriculture on greenhouse-gas emissions in the corn-growing regions of the US. Front Ecol Environ 10(2):69–74 Dipti P, Priyanka P (2013) Bioenergy crops an alternative energy. Int J Environ Eng Manag 4:265–272 Don A, Osborne B, Hastings A et al (2012) Land-use change to bioenergy production in E urope: implications for the greenhouse gas balance and soil carbon. GCB Bioenergy 4(4):372–391 Dunn JB, Mueller S, Kwon HY, Wang MQ (2013) Land-use change and greenhouse gas emissions from corn and cellulosic ethanol. Biotechnol Biofuels 6:1–13 EPA (2010) Renewable fuel standard program (RFS2) regulatory impact analysis. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC European Commission (2013) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Renewable energy progress report. COM (2013) 175 final. European Commission, Brussels European Photovoltaic Industry Association [EPIA] (2014) Global market outlook for photovoltaics 2014–2018. FAO (2008) The state of food and agriculture. In: Biofuels: prospects, risks and opportunities. FAO Report. Retrieved from ,http://www.fao.org/3/a-­i0100e.pdf. Fargione JE, Plevin RJ, Hill JD (2010) The ecological impact of biofuels. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:351–377

22

W. Liaqat et al.

Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319(5867):1235–1238 Fernández J, Curt MD, Aguado PL (2006) Industrial applications of Cynara cardunculus L. for energy and other uses. Ind Crop Prod 24(3):222–229 Finckh MR (2008) Integration of breeding and technology into diversification strategies for disease control in modern agriculture. In: Sustainable disease management in a European context, pp 399–409. Fortenbery TR, Bennett M (2004) Opportunities for commercial hemp production. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 26(1):97–117 Fu J, Jiang D, Huang Y, Zhuang D, Ji W (2014) Evaluating the marginal land resources suitable for developing bioenergy in Asia. Adv Meteorol 2014 Gelfand I, Sahajpal R, Zhang X, Izaurralde RC, Gross KL, Robertson GP (2013) Sustainable bioenergy production from marginal lands in the US Midwest. Nature 493(7433):514–517 Global Carbon Project 2022 Global carbon budget. https://www.globalcarbon project.org/carbonbudget/index.htm. Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) (2017) Global wind statistics. Gominho J, Curt MD, Lourenço A, Fernández J, Pereira H (2018) Cynara cardunculus L. as a biomass and multi-purpose crop: a review of 30 years of research. Biomass Bioenergy 109:257–275 Gostin AI, Waisundara VY (2019) Edible flowers as functional food: a review on artichoke (Cynara cardunculus L.). Trends Food Sci Technol 86:381–391 Gresshoff PM, Rangan L, Indrasumunar A, Scott PT (2017) A new bioenergy crop based on oil-­ rich seeds from the legume tree Pongamia pinnata. Energy Emission Control Technol 5:19–26 Gurgel A, Reilly JM, Paltsev S (2007) Potential land use implications of a global biofuels industry. J Agric Food Ind Organizat 5(2) Harris K, Subudhi PK, Borrell A et al (2007) Sorghum stay-green QTL individually reduce post-­ flowering drought-induced leaf senescence. J Exp Bot 58(2):327–338 Hatti-Kaul R, Törnvall U, Gustafsson L, Börjesson P (2007) Industrial biotechnology for the production of bio-based chemicals–a cradle-to-grave perspective. Trends Biotechnol 25(3):119–124 Herbert GJ, Krishnan AU (2016) Quantifying environmental performance of biomass energy. Renew Sust Energ Rev 59:292–308 Höök M, Tang X (2013) Depletion of fossil fuels and anthropogenic climate change—a review. Energy Policy 52:797–809 IEA (2011) Technology roadmap: biofuels for transport. OECD/IEA, Paris, France IEA, World Energy Outlook (2006) Paris, 2006. Retrieved from ,https://www.iea.org/publications/ freepublications/publication/weo2006.pdf. Ierna A, Mauromicale G (2010) Cynara cardunculus L. genotypes as a crop for energy purposes in a Mediterranean environment. Biomass Bioenergy 34(5):754–760 Irmak S, Meryemoglu B, Sandip A, Subbiah J, Mitchell RB, Sarath G (2018) Microwave pretreatment effects on switchgrass and miscanthus solubilization in subcritical water and hydrolysate utilization for hydrogen production. Biomass Bioenergy 108:48–54 Johnsson F, Kjärstad J, Rootzén J (2019) The threat to climate change mitigation posed by the abundance of fossil fuels. Clim Pol 19(2):258–274 Kays SJ, Nottingham SF (2007) Biology and chemistry of Jerusalem artichoke: Helianthus tuberosus L. CRC Press Keshwani DR, Cheng JJ (2009) Switchgrass for bioethanol and other value-added applications: a review. Bioresour Technol 100(4):1515–1523 Khan I, Hou F, Le HP (2021) The impact of natural resources, energy consumption, and population growth on environmental quality: fresh evidence from The United States of America. Sci Total Environ 754:142222 Khan MT, Seema N, Khan IA, Yasmine S (2017) Applications and potential of sugarcane as an energy crop. Agric Res Updates 16:1–24 Kim HK, Parajuli PB, To, S. F (2013) Assessing impacts of bioenergy crops and climate change on hydrometeorology in the Yazoo River basin, Mississippi. Agric For Meteorol 169:61–73

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

23

Kuglarz M, Gunnarsson IB, Svensson SE, Prade T, Johansson E, Angelidaki I (2014) Ethanol production from industrial hemp: effect of combined dilute acid/steam pretreatment and economic aspects. Bioresour Technol 163:236–243 Kumar AA, Reddy BVS, Blümmel M et al (2010) On-farm evaluation of elite sweet sorghum genotypes for grain and Stover yields and fodder quality. Anim Nutr Feed Technol 10(spl):69–78 Kyzas GZ, Terzopoulou Z, Nikolaidis V, Alexopoulou E, Bikiaris DN (2015) Low-cost hemp biomaterials for nickel ions removal from aqueous solutions. J Mol Liq 209:209–218 Landis DA, Gratton C, Jackson RD et al (2018) Biomass and biofuel crop effects on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the north central US. Biomass Bioenergy 114:18–29 Laopaiboon L, Thanonkeo P, Jaisil P, Laopaiboon P (2007) Ethanol production from sweet sorghum juice in batch and fed-batch fermentations by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 23:1497–1501 Larnaudie V, Ferrari MD, Lareo C (2022) Switchgrass as an alternative biomass for ethanol production in a biorefinery: perspectives on technology, economics and environmental sustainability. Renew Sust Energ Rev 158:112115 Lemus R, Lal R (2005) Bioenergy crops and carbon sequestration. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24(1):1–21 Li SY, Stuart JD, Li Y, Parnas RS (2010a) The feasibility of converting Cannabis sativa L. oil into biodiesel. Bioresour Technol 101(21):8457–8460 Li X, Hou S, Su M et al (2010b) Major energy plants and their potential for bioenergy development in China. Environ Manag 46:579–589 Linger P, Müssig J, Fischer H, Kobert J (2002) Industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) growing on heavy metal contaminated soil: fibre quality and phytoremediation potential. Ind Crop Prod 16(1):33–42 Liu CM, Wu SY (2016) From biomass waste to biofuels and biomaterial building blocks. Renew Energy 96:1056–1062 Liu R, Li J, Shen F (2008) Refining bioethanol from stalk juice of sweet sorghum by immobilized yeast fermentation. Renew Energy 33(5):1130–1135 Lord RA (2015) Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) outperforms miscanthus or willow on marginal soils, brownfield and non-agricultural sites for local, sustainable energy crop production. Biomass Bioenergy 78:110–125 Ma, X. Y., Zhang, L. H., Shao, H. B., Xu, G., Zhang, F., Ni, F. T., & Brestic, M. (2011a). Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus), a medicinal salt-resistant plant has high adaptability and multiple-use values Ma Y, An Y, Shui J, Sun Z (2011b) Adaptability evaluation of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) cultivars on the loess plateau of China. Plant Sci 181(6):638–643 Ma Z, Wood CW, Bransby DI (2000) Impacts of soil management on root characteristics of switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 18(2):105–112 Mabee WE, McFarlane PN, Saddler JN (2011) Biomass availability for lignocellulosic ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy 35(11):4519–4529 Manning P, Taylor G, Hanley M (2014) Bioenergy, food production and biodiversity-an unlikely alliance? GCB Bioenergy:1–18 Matsuoka S, Bressiani J, Maccheroni W, Fouto I (2015) Sugarcane bioenergy. In: Sugarcane. Academic Press, pp 383–405 Matzenberger J, Kranzl L, Tromborg E, Junginger M, Daioglou V, Goh CS, Keramidas K (2015) Future perspectives of international bioenergy trade. Renew Sust Energ Rev 43:926–941 Mauromicale G, Sortino O, Pesce GR, Agnello M, Mauro RP (2014) Suitability of cultivated and wild cardoon as a sustainable bioenergy crop for low input cultivation in low quality Mediterranean soils. Ind Crop Prod 57:82–89 McLaughlin SB, Kszos LA (2005) Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 28(6):515–535 Mehmood MA, Ahmad MS, Liu Q et al (2019) Helianthus tuberosus as a promising feedstock for bioenergy and chemicals appraised through pyrolysis, kinetics, and TG-FTIR-MS based study. Energy Convers Manag 194:37–45

24

W. Liaqat et al.

Mehmood MA, Ibrahim M, Rashid U, Nawaz M, Ali S, Hussain A, Gull M (2017) Biomass production for bioenergy using marginal lands. Sustain Prod Consump 9:3–21 Missaoui AM, Fasoula VA, Bouton JH (2005) The effect of low plant density on response to selection for biomass production in switchgrass. Euphytica 142:1–12 Monti A, Amaducci MT, Venturi G (2005) Growth response, leaf gas exchange and fructans accumulation of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) as affected by different water regimes. Eur J Agron 23(2):136–145 Negrao DR, Grandis A, Buckeridge MS, Rocha GJ, Leal MRL, Driemeier C (2021) Inorganics in sugarcane bagasse and straw and their impacts for bioenergy and biorefining: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 148:111268 Nixon DJ, Stephens W, Tyrrel SF, Brierley EDR (2001) The potential for short rotation energy forestry on restored landfill caps. Bioresour Technol 77(3):237–245 Olchin GP, Ogle S, Frey SD, Filley TR, Paustian K, Six J (2008) Residue carbon stabilization in soil aggregates of no-till and tillage management of dryland cropping systems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 72(2):507–513 Oleszek M, Kowalska I, Oleszek W (2019) Phytochemicals in bioenergy crops. Phytochem Rev 18:893–927 Oliveira I, Gominho J, Diberardino S, Duarte E (2012) Characterization of Cynara cardunculus L. stalks and their suitability for biogas production. Ind Crop Prod 40:318–323 Olivier JG, Schure KM, Peters JAHW (2017) Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 5:1–11 Ou MS, Awasthi D, Nieves I et al (2016) Sweet sorghum juice and bagasse as feedstocks for the production of optically pure lactic acid by native and engineered Bacillus coagulans strains. Bioenergy Res 9:123–131 Ozturk M, Saba N, Altay V, Iqbal R, Hakeem KR, Jawaid M, Ibrahim FH (2017) Biomass and bioenergy: an overview of the development potential in Turkey and Malaysia. Renew Sust Energ Rev 79:1285–1302 Paterson AH, Bowers JE, Bruggmann R et al (2009) The Sorghum bicolor genome and the diversification of grasses. Nature 457(7229):551–556 Pesce GR, Mauromicale G (2019) Cynara cardunculus L.: historical and economic importance, botanical descriptions, genetic resources and traditional uses. In: The globe artichoke Genome, pp 1–19. Pesce GR, Negri M, Bacenetti J, Mauromicale G (2017) The biomethane, silage and biomass yield obtainable from three accessions of Cynara cardunculus. Ind Crop Prod 103:233–239 Petropoulos SA, Fernandes Â, Calhelha RC, Danalatos N, Barros L, Ferreira IC (2018) How extraction method affects yield, fatty acids composition and bioactive properties of cardoon seed oil? Ind Crop Prod 124:459–465 Petropoulos S, Fernandes Â, Pereira C et al (2019) Bioactivities, chemical composition and nutritional value of Cynara cardunculus L. seeds. Food Chem 289:404–412 Pimsaen W, Jogloy S, Suriharn B, Kesmala T, Pensuk V, Patanothai A (2010) Genotype by environment (G× E) interactions for yield components of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.). Asian J Plant Sci 9(1):11–19 Pires JR, Souza VG, Fernando AL (2019) Valorization of energy crops as a source for nanocellulose production–current knowledge and future prospects. Ind Crop Prod 140:111642 Prade T (2011) Industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)–a high-yielding energy crop, vol. 2011, no. 2011, p. 95. Qin Z, Zhuang Q, Cai X et al (2018) Biomass and biofuels in China: toward bioenergy resource potentials and their impacts on the environment. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:2387–2400 Qin Z, Zhuang Q, Zhu X, Cai X, Zhang X (2011) Carbon consequences and agricultural implications of growing biofuel crops on marginal agricultural lands in China. Environ Sci Technol 45(24):10765–10772 Qiu Y, Lei P, Zhang Y et al (2018) Recent advances in bio-based multi-products of agricultural Jerusalem artichoke resources. Biotechnol Biofuels 11(1):1–15

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

25

Raccuia SA, Melilli MG (2007) Biomass and grain oil yields in Cynara cardunculus L. genotypes grown in a Mediterranean environment. Field Crop Res 101(2):187–197 Ragauskas AJ, Williams CK, Davison BH et al (2006) The path forward for biofuels and biomaterials. Science 311(5760):484–489 Ranalli P, Venturi G (2004) Hemp as a raw material for industrial applications. Euphytica 140(1–2):1–6 Rao SP, Rao SS, Seetharama N, Umakath AV, Reddy PS, Reddy BVS, Gowda CLL (2009) Sweet sorghum for biofuel and strategies for its improvement. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics Rebora C, Lelio H, Gómez L, Ibarguren L (2011) Waste water use in energy crops production. In: Waste water: treatment and reutilization Croacia, pp 361–374. Reddy BV, Ramesh S, Ashok Kumar A, Wani SP, Ortiz R, Ceballos H, Sreedevi TK (2008) Bio-fuel crops research for energy security and rural development in developing countries. Bioenergy Res 1:248–258 Regassa TH, Wortmann CS (2014) Sweet sorghum as a bioenergy crop: literature review. Biomass Bioenergy 64:348–355 Rehman MSU, Rashid N, Saif A, Mahmood T, Han JI (2013) Potential of bioenergy production from industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa): Pakistan perspective. Renew Sust Energ Rev 18:154–164 Rice B (2008) Hemp as a feedstock for biomass-to-energy conversion. J Ind Hemp 13(2):145–156 Robertson AD, Zhang Y, Sherrod LA, Rosenzweig ST, Ma L, Ahuja L, Schipanski ME (2018) Climate change impacts on yields and soil carbon in row crop dryland agriculture. J Environ Qual 47(4):684–694 Röder M, Welfle A (2019) Bioenergy. In: Managing global warming. Academic Press, pp 379–398 Rossini F, Provenzano ME, Kuzmanović L, Ruggeri R (2019) Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.): a versatile and sustainable crop for renewable energy production in Europe. Agronomy 9(9):528 Runge CF, Senauer B (2007) How biofuels could starve the poor. Foreign Aff 86:41 Samson R, Mani S, Boddey R et al (2005) The potential of C4 perennial grasses for developing a global BIOHEAT industry. BPTS 24(5–6):461–495 Sang TAO, Zhu W (2011) China's bioenergy potential. Gcb Bioenergy 3(2):79–90 Sankari HS (2000) Comparison of bast fibre yield and mechanical fibre properties of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) cultivars. Ind Crop Prod 11(1):73–84 Sawicka B, Skiba D, PszczóÅ P, Aslan I, Sharifi J, Krochmal-Marczak B (2020) Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) as a medicinal plant and its natural products. Cell Mol Biol 66(4):160–177 Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA et al (2008) Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319(5867):1238–1240 Shi J, Qing Q, Zhang T, Wyman CE, Lloyd TA (2011) Biofuels from cellulosic biomass via aqueous processing. In: Fundamentals of materials for energy and environmental sustainability, pp 336–349. Shoseyov O, Levy I, Shani Z, Mansfield SD (2003) Modulation of wood fibers and paper by cellulose-binding domains. Sims RE, Hastings A, Schlamadinger B, Taylor G, Smith P (2006) Energy crops: current status and future prospects. Glob Chang Biol 12(11):2054–2076 Sipos B, Réczey J, Somorai Z, Kádár Z, Dienes D, Réczey K (2009) Sweet sorghum as feedstock for ethanol production: enzymatic hydrolysis of steam-pretreated bagasse. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 153:151–162 Siri-Prieto G (2012) Switchgrass como alternativa energética en el Uruguay. CANGUE 32:31–39 Skevas T, Swinton SM, Hayden NJ (2014) What type of landowner would supply marginal land for energy crops? Biomass Bioenergy 67:252–259 Smeets EMW, Bouwman LF, Stehfest E, van Vuureen DP, Posthuma A (2009) Contribution of N2O to the greenhouse gas balance of first-generation biofuels. Glob Chang Biol 15:1–23

26

W. Liaqat et al.

Smith P, Davis SJ, Creutzig F et al (2016) Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions. Nat Clim Chang 6(1):42–50 Smith SL, Thelen KD, MacDonald SJ (2013) Yield and quality analyses of bioenergy crops grown on a regulatory brownfield. Biomass Bioenergy 49:123–130 Somani RB, Taylor JRN (2003) Sorghum: a potential source of raw material for agro-industries. In: Alternative uses of sorghum and pearl millet in Asia, p. 146. Somerville C, Youngs H, Taylor C, Davis SC, Long SP (2010) Feedstocks for lignocellulosic biofuels. Science 329(5993):790–792 SSI (State of Sustainability Initiatives) (2016) Biofuels and indirect land-use change: VSS responding to the foodversus-fuel debate. In: Commentary report—December 2016. Retrieved from https://www.iisd.org/ssi/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Biofuels_publications-1.pdf. Swaminathan K, Alabady MS, Varala K et  al (2010) Genomic and small RNA sequencing of miscanthus× giganteusshows the utility of sorghum as a reference genome sequence for Andropogoneae grasses. Genome Biol 11(2):1–18 Takamizawa KAZUHIRO, Anderson W, Singh HP (2010) Ethanol from lignocellulosic crops. In: Industrial crops and uses. CABI, Wallingford UK, pp 104–139 Tammisola J (2010) Towards much more efficient biofuel crops-can sugarcane pave the way? GM Crops 1(4):181–198 Tesso TT, Claflin LE, Tuinstra MR (2005) Analysis of stalk rot resistance and genetic diversity among drought tolerant sorghum genotypes. Crop Sci 45(2):645–652 Tilman D, Hill J, Lehman C (2006) Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science 314(5805):1598–1600 Tollefson J (2022) Scientists raise alarm over'dangerously fast'growth in atmospheric methane. Nature Tutt M, Kikas T, Olt J (2013) Influence of harvesting time on biochemical composition and glucose yield from hemp. Agron Res 11(1):215–220 U.S. Department of Energy (2011) U.S. billion-ton update: biomass supply for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry. In: Perlack RD, Stokes BJ (leads) ORNL/TM-2011/224. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 227p. Umakanth AV, Kumar AA, Vermerris W, Tonapi VA (2019) Sweet sorghum for biofuel industry. In: Breeding sorghum for diverse end uses. Woodhead Publishing, pp 255–270 UNCCD (2017) Global land outlook. United Nations (2015). http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-­development-­goals/ Van der Werf HM (2004) Life cycle analysis of field production of fibre hemp, the effect of production practices on environmental impacts. Euphytica 140(1–2):13–23 Vergara P, Ladero M, García-Ochoa F, Villar JC (2018) Valorization of Cynara Cardunculus crops by ethanol-water treatment: optimization of operating conditions. Ind Crop Prod 124:856–862 Waclawovsky AJ, Sato PM, Lembke CG, Moore PH, Souza GM (2010) Sugarcane for bioenergy production: an assessment of yield and regulation of sucrose content. Plant Biotechnol J 8(3):263–276 Wahba HE, Sarhan AZ, Salama AB, Sharaf-Eldin MA, Gad HM (2016) Growth response and active constituents of Cynara cardunculus plants to the number of leaves harvests. Eur J Agron 73:118–123 Wang M, Han J, Dunn JB, Cai H, Elgowainy A (2012) Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane and cellulosic biomass for US use. Environ Res Lett 7(4):045905 Wang S, Zhao W, Lee TS et al (2018) Dimethyl sulfoxide assisted ionic liquid pretreatment of switchgrass for isoprenol production. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 6(3):4354–4361 Wang X, Zhang ZT, Wang Y, Wang Y (2016) Improvement of acetone–butanol–ethanol (ABE) production from switchgrass pretreated with a radio frequency-assisted heating process. Fuel 182:166–173 Werling BP, Dickson TL, Isaacs R et  al (2014) Perennial grasslands enhance biodiversity and multiple ecosystem services in bioenergy landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111(4):1652–1657

1  Bioenergy Crops in the Perspective of Climate Change

27

White WG, Moose SP, Weil CF, McCann MC, Carpita NC, Below FE (2011) Tropical maize: exploiting maize genetic diversity to develop a novel annual crop for lignocellulosic biomass and sugar production. In: Routes to cellulosic ethanol, pp 167–179. Whitfield MB, Chinn MS, Veal MW (2012) Processing of materials derived from sweet sorghum for biobased products. Ind Crop Prod 37(1):362–375 World Energy Resources (2016) World energy council. Istanbul. Wu X, Staggenborg S, Propheter JL, Rooney WL, Yu J, Wang D (2008) Features and fermentation performance of sweet sorghum juice after harvest. In 2008 providence, Rhode Island, June 29–July 2, 2008. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, p. 1. Yadav P, Priyanka P, Kumar D, Yadav A, Yadav K (2019) Bioenergy crops: recent advances and future outlook. In: Prospects of renewable bioprocessing in future energy systems, pp 315–335. Yuan JS, Tiller KH, Al-Ahmad H, Stewart NR, Stewart CN (2008) Plants to power: bioenergy to fuel the future. Trends Plant Sci 13(8):421–429 Zegada-Lizarazu W, Monti A (2012) Are we ready to cultivate sweet sorghum as a bioenergy feedstock? a review on field management practices. Biomass Bioenergy 40:1–12 Zhao J, Xu Y, Wang W, Griffin J, Wang D (2020) Conversion of liquid hot water, acid and alkali pretreated industrial hemp biomasses to bioethanol. Bioresour Technol 309:123383

2

Major and Potential Biofuel Crops Zemran Mustafa, Gizem Deveci, and Kübra Çelik

Abstract

Biofuels are renewable fuels that are derived from biomass of living organisms. Most of the biofuels are produced in the form of bioethanol and biodiesel. While with time fossil fuels have gain bad reputation due to their negative side effects on climate, biofuels are emerging as an alterntive to the nonrenewable fossil fuels. In the pursuit of sustainable methods for energy production, biofuels are gaining popularity as their green house gas emissions are low, produce less pollution, theoriticaly can be sustained indefinitely, can be produced domestically and facilitate independence from foreign fossil fuel suppliers, and have positive effects on the soil and climate. Many crops are used as biofuel crop, and there is a plethora of crops that have the potential to be utilized for biofuel production. In this chapter, some crops that are currently used for biofuel production, their characteristics, and worldwide production are explained. Moreover, some promising biofuel crops are explored for their potential of becoming new sources of biofuel production.

2.1 Introduction Producing sufficient energy in the twenty-first century, with ever-increasing demand per person, is a significant challenge. The use of fossil fuels to produce energy degrades natural resources and increases greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon Z. Mustafa (*) Departmen of Plant Production and Technologies, Faculty of Agriculture Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey G. Deveci · K. Çelik Graduate Students at Faculty of Agriculture Sciences and Technology, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_2

29

30

Z. Mustafa et al.

dioxide and nitrous oxide, which negatively affect the climate (Pathak and Dudhagi 2021). Rising fuel prices, increasing energy demand, and global warming have been the most important motivations to explore natural and renewable sources to satisfy the energy demand. To produce new cleaner fuels, there is a need of developing economically feasible, environmentally friendly, and energy-efficient processes (Volli et al. 2021). Biofuels are produced from organic matter, derived from living organisms and their biomass. Compared to conventional fuels, they have reduced carbon emissions and positive impact on rural development. Rising fuel prices and their negative impact on environment make biofuels an attractive alternative to fossil fuels (Pathak and Dudhagi 2021). On the other hand, there is a more traditional use of biofuel crops as food and feed in the world market which raises food safety concerns. However, as biofuel crops reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase soil carbon, reduce soil erosion, increase transpiration, and provide heat and electricity, their global market continues to grow (Wang et al. 2012; Yuan et al. 2008). Energy derived from plant and animal biomass is called bioenergy (Taylor 2008). Biofuels in the form of bioethanol and biodiesel account for the bulk of bioenergy production worldwide, and most fuels are obtained through biochemical processes. The main producers of bioethanol are Brazil and the United States, which account for about 89% of world production (World Development Report 2008). On the other hand, the European Union is the world’s largest biodiesel producer (OECD-FAO 2009). The United States has been the world’s largest producer of ethanol fuel since 2005 and the world’s largest exporter since 2010 (Gupta et al. 2014). In 2011, the United States produced 52.6 billion liters of ethanol, while Brazil produced 21.1 billion liters, representing 24.9% of the world’s total ethanol used as fuel (Renewable Fuels Association 2012). While 277,700 terawatt hours of bioenergy were produced worldwide in 2009, this value has more than doubled reaching 583.800 terawatt hours in 2020. The steady increase in global bioenergy production between 2009 and 2020 is given in Fig. 2.1. This book chapter mainly focuses on the production and advantages of the main agricultural resources used in biofuel production. It also drew attention to new crops that have the potential to be used in biofuel production (Table 2.1).

2.1.1 Maize (Zea mays L.) Maize (corn) (Fig. 2.2) is a crop with a high-grain yield that can be grown in a wide variety of climatic conditions. It is an effective feed product due to the high accumulation of starch in grains. The widespread use of maize raw material as a staple food in many countries adversely affects biofuel production. The use of maize in the production of bioenergy fuels could lead to hunger and increase worldwide food prices. To overcome this problem, a sweet maize variety was bred using spontaneous recessive mutations in genes that regulate the conversion of sugars to starch in the maize kernel endosperm (Pathak and Dudhagi 2021).

31

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

Production of bioenergy (in terawatt hours)

Global Bioenergy Production 2009-2020

600,00 500,00 400,00 300,00 200,00 100,00 0

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Years

Fig. 2.1  Global bioenergy production between 2009 and 2020 (Statista 2020) Table 2.1  Used and promising crops in biofuel production Biofuel type Used crops Biodiesel Soybean, rapeseed, palm oil, Jatropha

Bioethanol

Maize, sugarcane, sugar beet, sweet sorghum

Promising crops Tobacco seed, rapeseed, cotton, olive, sunflower, safflower, sesame, peanut, flax, almond, laurel, walnut, flax oil, date, castor oil, oat, rapeseed, cotton, cassava Barley, beetroot, potato, sweet potato, wheat, cassava

References Horuz et al. (2015), Araújo et al. (2017), Banerjee et al. (2019), Lareo and Ferrari (2019), Mangmeechai and Pavasant (2013), Pathak and Dudhagi (2021), Sezek (2018)

In addition, the high volatile compound content of maize and the simple processing method make maize a preferred product for bioconversion. During ethanol production from raw materials, water consumption per unit of ethanol produced is low (Elbehri et al. 2013; Aden 2007; NRC 2008). The United States ranks first globally in corn-based bioethanol production (Araújo et al. 2017). At the same time, Brazil and China are the main countries producing corn-based biofuel. Around 10.58 L of ethanol can be produced from a bushel (35.24 L) of corn. The total maize used for fuel alcohol production in the United States in 2021 was over 181 billion litres (National Agricultural Statistics Service 2021).

2.1.2 Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.) Sugarcane (Fig. 2.3) is the second-largest raw material used for ethanol production in the world. It is also a staple food crop grown in tropical climates. It can give many harvests with a single planting and is grown in deep soil by using fertilizers with

32

Z. Mustafa et al.

Fig. 2.2  Maize plant grown for its biomass (Christian Fischer 2011)

high nitrogen and potassium and low phosphorus content. Sugarcane requires a constant supply of water throughout the growing season, depending on climatic conditions. Brazil ranks first in sugarcane-based bioethanol production (Araújo et al. 2017). India, China, and Thailand are the biggest producer after Brazil in the following order. The state of São Paulo is a prime location for sugarcane production, with 352.2 million tons of sugarcane production in an area of 4.6 million hectares during 2017–2018 (Antunes et al. 2019). Sugarcane production in Brazil in 2021 has been reported as 715 million tons with an expectation to grow even higher in the following years. Total bioethanol production in Brazil in 2022 was 31.66 billion liters, while biodiesel production was 6.40 billion liters (IEA 2022).

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

33

Fig. 2.3  Sugarcane plant in field (Sarangib 2023)

2.1.3 Sweet Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) Sorghum is an important product worldwide, with its high nutritional value, ease of transportation and storage, and extensive usage as feed and for sugar production (Budak 2017). Sweet sorghum (Fig. 2.4) is an annual grass plant with a high sugar content compared to other Sorghum varieties. Although grown in subtropical, temperate, and tropical regions, it is a Sorghum variety that has the ability to grow even in limited water resources and also in poor and shallow soils (Mathur et al. 2017). Sweet sorghum is a potential biofuel product with its high sugar content and ability to grow in different climatic conditions. As a bioenergy source, the juice of sweet sorghum is used in the production of bioethanol (Zegada-Lizarazu and Monti 2012). It can produce more ethanol than other energy plants due to its easily extractable properties. Up to 6000 L of ethanol can be produced from 1 ha of sweet sorghum (Regassa and Wortmann 2014). According to 2021–2022 Statista data, the top five Sorghum producers in the world are the United States, Nigeria, Mexico, Ethiopia, and India. In 2021–2022, the United States became the world’s largest Sorghum producer with 11.4 million tons of Sorghum production (Statista 2023a). Traditionally, the United States uses approximately one-third of its Sorghum crop for renewable fuel production (Anonymous 2023a). Sweet sorghum is a multipurpose crop. In Fig. 2.5, the various uses of sweet sorghum grains and stalks have been illustrated (Mathur et al. 2017).

34

Z. Mustafa et al.

Fig. 2.4  Sweet sorghum (Michele Dorsey Walfred 2019)

2.1.4 Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris) Sugar beet (Fig. 2.6) is a crop that only grows in temperate areas. It is a biennial, herbaceous, dicotyledonous, and tuberous plant. In the first year, a fleshy taproot emerges, surrounded by secondary roots, while in second year, it is characterized with its reproductive stage and seed-stalk development. Leaves form a rosette configuration which develop from an underground stem. Vernalization is an essential component of the reproductive phase of sugar beets, and flowering occurs only after this event (Biancardi and de Biaggi 2020). The weight of sugar beet ranges generally from 0.5 to 1 kg. Roots of sugar beet contain 75% water, 20% sugar, and 5% pulp. Depending on the cultivar and environment, the concentration of sugar may range from 12 to 21% (Subrahmanyeswari and Gantait 2022). Its sugar content is approximately 25% higher than that of sugarcane. However, the production cost of sugar beet is twice than that of sugarcane (Marzo et al. 2019). Nonfood industrial sugar beet production has the potential to double the ethanol production per hectare compared to other raw materials. Russia is the country with the highest sugar beet production in the world constituting 15.68% of the world’s production with 41.2 million tons in 2021. Russia, France, the United States, Germany, and Turkey are the five main sugar beet-producing countries, and they constitute 60.56% of the total production. Total sugar beet production in the world was reported as 262 million tons in 2021. The European Union ranks first in biofuel production from sugar beet (Knomea 2022).

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

35

Fig. 2.5  By-products of sweet sorghum (adapted from Mathur et al. 2017)

Bio-ethanol Flour

Grains Vinegar

Sweet sorghum

Animal feed Paper Electricity Bagesse

Bio composting Animal feed

Stalks

Ethanol Syrup(food) Juice

Jaggery Bio-ethanol

Fig. 2.6  Sugarbeet plant (WordPress, Blogspot A)

36

Z. Mustafa et al.

2.1.5 Soybean (Glycine max L.) Soybean (Fig.  2.7) is a warm climate plant with a very high nutritional value. Soybean originating from Southeast Asia is an important oil crop in North America, South America, and Asia (Thakur and Hurburgh 2007). Its seeds contain 18–24% oil and 30–40% protein (Tugay 2007). Soybean pulp is a product used for animal feed and human food (Rahman et al. 2021). Its seed is a potential biofuel due to its high oil content and the possibility of being grown in different regions. It is the main food product used as a raw material for biodiesel production (Banerjee et al. 2019). World soybean production in 2022 was 377 million tons. Brazil ranks first with 136 million tons. The United States ranks second with 116 million tons, followed by Argentina, China, and India (OECD 2023). Products obtained from soybeans are processed and used in different fields (Fig. 2.8). Its oil constitutes approximately 50% of the biodiesel raw material. An estimated 4.7 million tons of soybean oil were used to produce biofuels in 2021–2022. The USDA currently expects 5.2 million tons of soybean oil to be used for biofuel production during 2022–2023 (Voegele 2021).

2.1.6 Rapeseed (Brassica napus) The European Union has focused on producing biodiesel from soybean, date, and rapeseed (canola) seeds for biofuel production (Huenteler and Lee 2015). Rapeseed (Fig. 2.9) is a product that has been invested in Asia in recent years due to its high oil content. Canada, China, India, and Germany are the main rapeseed-producing countries. Rapeseed oil is one of the most effective and efficient sources for biodiesel with its cold-flow feature. Its oil is very suitable for use as a biofuel due to its

Fig. 2.7  Soybean (anonymous 2023b)

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

37

Fig. 2.8  Soybean processing by-products (adapted from Al Loman and Ju 2016)

low saturated fat content. Soybean, which is a biodiesel raw material, yields 18% oil when crushed, while rapeseed seeds yields approximately 45% oil when crushed. Germany is the third in biofuel production, with 12 million liters produced daily. On the other hand, Argentina registered 11,218 million liters per day with a total capacity of 2.7%, placing it in the fourth place worldwide (Singh et al. 2022).

2.1.7 Palm Oil (Elaeis guineensis) Palm oil is produced from the fruits of the palm tree Elaeis guineensis (Fig. 2.10). The palm tree, which is widely grown in different parts of Asia and North and South America, has its origin in West Africa. In addition to having a life span of 25–30 years, the palm tree can grow to a height of 30–40 m (Çelik 2022). Palm oil is best grown in tropical and rainy soils (Banerjee et al. 2019). Palm fruit can yield up to 3–4 tons of fruit per year. For this reason, it is an important source of biofuels due to its high oil yield per hectare and its ability to grow in different tropical climates. The most important feature that distinguishes palm oil from other vegetable oils is that it is obtained from both the palm fruit and the kernel of the palm fruit

38

Z. Mustafa et al.

Fig. 2.9  Rapeseed flowers (WordPress, Blogspot B)

Fig. 2.10  Palm tree (anonymous 2023c)

(Zahan and Kano 2018). The oil obtained from the fruit of the palm tree can be processed into biodiesel. Palm oil, which is one of the vegetable oil sources, is an inexpensive biofuel raw material (Khatun et al. 2017). The use of palm oil as biodiesel contributes to less than 50–70% greenhouse gas emissions compared to petro-diesel (Zahan and Kano 2018). Palm oil biodiesel

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

39

consumption in 2019 was 6.2 and 0.94 million liters in Indonesia and in Malaysia, respectively. Eighty five percent of palm oil in the world is produced in Indonesia and Malaysia (Zahan and Kano 2018). Worldwide palm oil production between 2020 and 2021 was 73.8 million tons (Statista 2023b). It is the main source for biodiesel production in Malaysia, Indonesia, and some Southeast Asian countries (Banerjee et al. 2019).

2.1.8  Jatropha (Jatropha curcas L.) Jatropha (Fig. 2.11) has the form of a dwarf tree or shrub that can grow 3–5 m in height but can reach 8–10  m in height under suitable conditions (Byrappa et  al. 2018). It is a tree with a life span of up to 50 years and bears fruit throughout its lifetime. The seed of the Jatropha fruit contains 35–40% oil (Imran et al. 2013). Since its oil is poisonous, it is not consumed (Luiz 2019). It is grown in marginal lands and in various climatic conditions. Jatropha is versatile with its drought tolerance. It can shed its leaves to save water. There are many countries investing in the cultivation of Jatropha around the world. Guatemala is currently the largest producer of Jatropha, with 25,000 acres of land. Some other countries such as Indonesia, Sudan, Ethiopia, India and Mexico are currently investing in growing Jatropha (Banerjee et al. 2019). The oil obtained after decomposition of Jatropha seed glycerol and oilseed pulp is used as biofuel (Singh and Padhi 2009). The National Biodiesel Mission (NBM) identified Jatropha as the most suitable inedible oilseed for biodiesel production to achieve the recommended 20% biodiesel blend with conventional diesel by 2017. However, this target was not achieved due to economic and agricultural constraints. Several African countries, including Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Lesotho, Ghana, Madagascar, South Africa, and Malawi, are exploring the potential of Jatropha as a large-scale biofuel raw material (Banerjee et al. 2019). Jatropha plant has many species such as J. elliptica, J. gossypiifolia, J. dioica, and J. curcas and is used in different areas. Jatropha curcas is used as a biofuel due to its high oil content compared to other species and its resistance to harsh environmental conditions (Byrappa et al. 2018). Biofuel production from biomass waste of Jatropha curcas L. has been illustrated in Fig. 2.12. Fig. 2.11  Jatropha curcas fruits (Ton Rulkens 2019)

40

Z. Mustafa et al.

2.2 Potential and Promising Biofuel Crops 2.2.1 Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) The tobacco plant (Fig. 2.13a) is an annual herbaceous plant and its homeland is estimated to be the Americas. It is among the aromatic plants and industrial plants (Karabacak 2017). Tobacco seed (Fig. 2.13b, c) is a by-product of leaf tobacco production which has a rich oil content of 38–42% (Horuz et al. 2015; Çalışkan et al. 2009). The main purpose in tobacco cultivation is to obtain leaves. During harvesting, tobacco seeds are mixed into the soil. For this reason, seed production and seed yield are ignored in tobacco cultivation. However, tobacco seed is a plant that can be used as an alternative biofuel with its oil content higher than soybean (Çalışkan et al. 2009). China is the country with the largest tobacco farming in the world. The top five countries in the world that cultivate tobacco are China, the United States, Germany, Indonesia, and the United Kingdom. According to Statista 2023c data, China ranks first with 228,9 billion tons of world tobacco production in 2022. The United States ranked second with 83,6 billion tons (Statista 2023c).

2.2.2 Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) The cotton plant (Fig. 2.14), whose homeland is India, is a versatile cultivar used with its root, stem, flower, and seed (Tokel 2021). It is in the form of shrubby tree

Fig. 2.12  Biomass waste from Jatropha curcas L. oil production (adapted from Primandari et al. 2018)

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

41

Fig. 2.13  Tobacco plant (a) in the field (Ikhlasul Amal 2012), (b) seed in capsules (Anonymous 2023d), (c) seeds (Anonymous 2023e)

Fig. 2.14  Cotton field (Kimberly Vardeman 2011)

and is widely produced for its fiber and seed in more than 90 countries. Approximately 2.5% of the cultivation areas worldwide are used in cotton production (Anonymous 2023f). Cotton can be used as renewable energy source by producing biofuel from its woody plant parts. According to the results of the research, the calorific value of the cotton stalk is 18.3 MJ/kg. If this value is compared with other fuel types, it is stated that the heating value of 1 kg of cotton straw is equivalent to 0.61 kg of coal or 0.46 kg of fuel oil (Sezek 2018). According to Statista, the countries that cultivate the most cotton in the world are China, India, the United States, Brazil, Pakistan, Australia, and Turkey. Between 2021 and 2022, China ranks first with 5.8 million tons. India ranks second in cotton production with 5.3 million tons (Statista 2023d).

2.2.3 Cassava (Manihot esculenta) Cassava (Fig.  2.15) is an important food product in Africa with an average consumption of 50 kg/capita/year (FAO 2018). Globally, cassava yield is just over 11

42

Z. Mustafa et al.

Fig. 2.15  Cassava (a) tuber part (Thamizhpparithi Maari 2013) and (b) cassava in the field (Anonymous 2023g)

tons per hectare. Africa produced more than 63% of the 303 million tons of cassava produced globally in 2019 (FAO 2019). Cassava root contains 11.62% hemicellulose and 21.43% cellulose as fermentable sugars in the form of lignocellulose (Sovorawet and Kongkiattikajorn 2012). Cassava is an important root crop for food due to its high starch content and woody tuberous structure. Likewise, its tuberous root structure is suitable for use as a bioenergy crop. However, since tuberous roots are primarily used for food, this creates competition for bioenergy production. Nigeria is the global leader in cassava production and consumption with the yield of 7 tons per hectare. The yields in India and China are 30,000 and 16,000 kg per hectare, respectively (Fathima et al. 2023). Bioethanol yield from cassava feedstock is comparable to sugarcane. It is known that bioethanol yield is higher when compared to corn and sweet potato. The potential effects of a crop on water consumption, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions are important when considering it as a bioenergy crop (Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha et al. 2021). The water requirement for cassava ethanol production was reported to be 2300–2820  L water/L ethanol which is higher than water consumption from sugarcane molasses (1510–1990 L water/L) (Mangmeechai and Pavasant 2013).

2.2.4 Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) Fresh sweet potato (Fig. 2.16) has a high water content. Starch makes up about 80% of the dry matter. It also contains simple soluble sugars such as glucose, fructose, and sucrose, small amounts of fiber, protein, and other substances that cause the sweet taste of sweet potato root. Sweet potato crops have a variety of agronomic traits that determine their drought tolerance, saline base tolerance, high growth rate and low degeneration of reproductive material, short growth cycle, low incidence of disease, and broad adaptation to marginal areas (Mukherjee 2015; Mukherjee et al. 2012). It can grow up to 2500 m above sea level (International Potato Center 2017). Asia and Africa, together with China, account for more than 90% of the world’s current production of sweet potatoes. China is the primary producer of sweet

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

43

Fig. 2.16  Sweet potato (USDA 2013)

potatoes, accounting for 57% of global production in 2019 with 52 million tons (Tang et  al. 2022). Other relevant producers in Asia are Indonesia, Vietnam, and India; Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Angola, and Mozambique in Africa; and in the Americas are Brazil and the United States (Lareo and Ferrari 2019).

References Aden A (2007) Water usage for current and future ethanol production. Southwest Hydrol 6:22–23 Al Loman A, Ju LK (2016) Soybean carbohydrate as fermentation feedstock for production of biofuels and value-added chemicals. Process Biochem 51(8):1046–1057 Anonymous (2023a). https://www.sorghumcheckoff.com/sorghum101/#:~:text=Sorghum%20 is%20traditionally%20grown%20throughout,of%2073.2%20bushels%20per%20acre. Retrieved on 7 Feb 2023 Anonymous (2023b). https://www.hippopx.com/en/query?q=soybean Retrieved on 18 Feb 2023 Anonymous (2023c). https://pxhere.com/en/photo/1245110 Retrieved on 18 Feb 2023 Anonymous (2023d). https://www.dreamstime.com/starting-­growing-­tobacco-­seeds-­require-­ warm-­temperatures-­germination-­degrees-­tobacco-­seeds-­isolated-­white-­image195617976 Anonymous (2023e). https://www.dreamstime.com/photos-­images/tobacco-­seeds.html. Retrieved on 17 Feb 2023 Anonymous (2023f). https://wikifarmer.com/tr/pamuk-­bitkisi-­hakkinda-­bilgi/. Retrieved on 13 Feb 2023 Anonymous (2023g). https://www.wallpaperflare.com/field-­of-­green-­plants-­cassava-­manihot-­ esculenta-­crop-­plantation-­wallpaper-­wozpz Retrieved on 17 Feb 2023

44

Z. Mustafa et al.

Antunes FA, Chandel AK, Terán-Hilares R et  al. (2019) Biofuel production from sugarcane in Brazil. In: Sugarcane biofuels: status, potential, and prospects of the sweet crop to fuel the world, pp. 99–121 Araújo K, Mahajan D, Kerr R, Silva M (2017) Global biofuels at the crossroads: an overview of technical, policy, and investment complexities in the sustainability of biofuel development. Agriculture 7(32):1–22 Banerjee S, Kaushik S, Tomar RS (2019) Global scenario of biofuel production: past, present and future. Prospects of renewable bioprocessing in future energy systems, pp. 499–518 Biancardi E, de Biaggi M (2020) Morphology. In: Biancardi E, Panella L, McGrath J (eds) Beta maritima. Springer, Cham, pp 61–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­030-­28748-­1_3 Budak T (2017) Önemli Bir Yem Bitkisi: SORGUM. 21. Yüzyılda Fen ve Teknik 2(8):37–44 Byrappa M, Viswanathan M, Doss J, et al. (2018) Review on Jatropha Çalışkan Ö, Odabaş MS, Çamaş N (2009) Tütün (Nicotiana tabacum L.) tohumunun biyoyakıt olarak değerlendirilmesi. Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 4(2):46–55 Çelik FH (2022) Bitkisel Yağ Sektöründe Sürdürülebilir Palm Yağı Yuvarlak Masası’nın (RSPO) Önemi. SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR 32. Retrieved on 16 Feb 2023 Christian Fischer 2011 Maize plant. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZeaMays.jpg. Retrieved on 20 Feb 2023 Elbehri A, Liu A, Segerstedt A, Liu P, Babilonia Estrada R, Hölldobler BW, Davies SJC, Stephen Navarro CL, Andrew JF, Pérez H (2013) Biofuels and the sustainability challenge: a global assessment of sustainability issues, trends and policies for biofuels and related feedstocks. FAO, Rome, Italy FAO (2018) Ethiopia: Report on feed inventory and feed balance, 2018. Rome, Italy. 160 pages. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. https://www.fao.org/3/ca1718en/CA1718EN.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2023 FAO (2019) The state of food and agriculture 2019. Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. https://www.fao.org/3/ca6030en/ca6030en.pdf. Accessed 24 Apr 2023 Fathima AA, Sanitha M, Tripathi L, Muiruri S (2023) Cassava (Manihot esculenta) dual use for food and bioenergy: a review. Food and Energy Security 12(1):e380 Gupta VK, Potumarthi R, O’Donovan A et al. (2014) Bioenergy research: an overview on technological developments and bioresources. Chem Biolog Eng Horuz A, Korkmaz A, Akınoğlu G (2015) Biyoyakıt bitkileri ve teknolojisi. Toprak Bilimi ve Bitki Besleme Dergisi 3(2):69–81 Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha H, Aghbashlo M, Tabatabaei M (2021) Life cycle assessment of bioenergy product systems: a critical review. e-Prime-Adv Electr Eng Electr Energy 1:100015 Huenteler J, Lee H (2015) The future of low carbon road transport. Rapporteur’s report IEA (2022). https://www.iea.org/countries/brazil. Retrieved on 9 Mar 2023 Ikhlasul Amal (2012). https://www.flickr.com/photos/ikhlasulamal/8626492624. Retrieved on 25 Feb 2023 Imran A, Masjuki HH, Kalam MA et al (2013) Study of friction and wear characteristic of jatropha oil blended lube oil. Procedia Eng 68:178–185 International Potato Center (2017) Facts and figures about sweet potato. http://cipotato.org/sweetpotato/facts. Retrieved 25 Feb 2023 Karabacak K (2017) Türkiye’de tütün tarımı ve coğrafi dağılışı. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi 15(1):27–48 Khatun R, Reza MIH, Moniruzzaman M, Yaakob Z (2017) Sustainable oil palm industry: the possibilities. Renew Sust Energ Rev 76:608–619 Kimberly Vardeman (2011). https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cotton_field_kv17.jpg. Retrieved on 27 Feb 2023 Knomea (2022). https://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Agriculture/Crops-­Production-­Quantity-­tonnes/ Sugar-­beet-­production

2  Major and Potential Biofuel Crops

45

Lareo C, Ferrari MD (2019) Sweet potato as a bioenergy crop for fuel ethanol production: perspectives and challenges. In: Bioethanol Production from Food Crops, pp.  115–147. https://doi. org/10.1016/b978-­0-­12-­813766-­6.00007-­2 Luiz N (2019) Jatropha curcas poisoning. J Indian Med Assoc 117(4):25–26 Mangmeechai A, Pavasant P (2013) Water footprints of cassava-and molasses-based ethanol production in Thailand. Nat Resour Res 22:273–282 Marzo C, Díaz AB, Caro I, Blandino A (2019) Status and perspectives in bioethanol production from sugar beet. In: Bioethanol production from food crops, pp. 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/ b978-­0-­12-­813766-­6.00004-­7 Mathur S, Umakanth AV, Tonapi VA, Sharma R, Sharma MK (2017) Sweet sorghum as biofuel feedstock: recent advances and available resources. Biotechnol Biofuels 10:1–19 Michele Dorsey Walfred (2019). https://www.flickr.com/photos/dorseymw/48809404263. Retrieved on 20 Mar 2023 Mukherjee A (2015) Sweet potato and taro resilient to stresses: sustainable livelihood in fragile zones vulnerable to climate changes. J Environ Sociobiol 12:53–64 Mukherjee, A., Naskar, S.K., Rao, K.R., Ray, R.C., 2012. Sweet potato gains through biotechnology National Agricultural Statistics Service (2021). https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ results/541FCF9E-­5106-­3F7E-­AD8E-­6678FB2032C3. Retrieved 22 Apr 2023 National Research Council (NRC) (2008) Water implications of biofuels production in the United States. NRC, Washington, DC, USA OECD (2023). https://data.oecd.org/agroutput/crop-­production.htm. Retrieved 13 Feb 2023 OECD U (2009) OECD W. Annu Rep. Pathak G, Dudhagi SS (2021) Bioenergy crops as an alternate energy resource. In: Bioprospecting of plant biodiversity for industrial molecules. pp. 357–376 Primandari SRP, Islam AKMA, Yaakob Z, et al. (2018) Jatropha curcas L. biomass waste and its utilization. Advances in Biofuels and Bioenergy Rahman MM, Mat K, Ishigaki G, Akashi R (2021) A review of okara (soybean curd residue) utilization as animal feed: nutritive value and animal performance aspects. Anim Sci J 92(1) Regassa TH, Wortmann CS (2014) Sweet sorghum as a bioenergy crop: literature review. Biomass Bioenergy 64:348–355 Renewable Fuels Association (2012) Accelerating industry innovation 2012. Ethanol Industry Outlook. Renewable Fuels Association, pp. 3e23 Sarangib (2023). https://www.needpix.com/photo/151303/. Retrieved on 20 Feb 2023 Sezek M (2018) Endüstri Bitkileri ve Bitki Artıklarının Biyoyakıt Olarak Kullanımı. Alinteri J Agric Sci 33(1):105–111 Singh RK, Padhi SK (2009) Characterization of jatropha oil for the preparation of biodiesel Singh AR, Singh SK, Jain S (2022) A review on bioenergy and biofuel production. Mater Today 49:510–516 Sovorawet B, Kongkiattikajorn J (2012) Bioproduction of ethanol in SHF and SSF from cassava stalks. Asia-Pacific J Sci Technol 17(4):565–572 Statista (2020). https://www.statista.com/statistics/1032907/bioenergy-­production-­globally/. Retrieved on 12 Feb 2023 Statista (2023a). https://www.statista.com/statistics/1134651/global-­sorghum-­production-­by-­ country/. Retrieved on 20 Feb 2023 Statista (2023b). https://www.statista.com/statistics/613471/palm-­oil-­production-­ volumeworldwide/#:~:text=The%20global%20production%20of%20palm,exporters%20 of%20palm%20oil%20worldwide. Retrieved on 18 Feb 2023 Statista (2023c). https://www.statista.com/forecasts/758622/revenue-­of-­the-­tobacco-­products-­ market-­worldwide-­by-­country. Retrieved on 12 Feb 2023 Statista (2023d). https://www.statista.com/statistics/263055/cotton-­production-­worldwide-­by-­top-­ countries/. Retrieved on 17 Feb 2023 Subrahmanyeswari T, Gantait S (2022) Advancements and prospectives of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) biotechnology. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 106(22):7417–7430

46

Z. Mustafa et al.

Tang C, Jiang B, Ameen A, Mo X, Yang Y, Wang Z (2022) Life-cycle energy, economic, and greenhouse gas emissions of diversified sweet-potato-based cropping Systems in South China. Agronomy 12(10):2340 Taylor G (2008) Bioenergy for heat and electricity in the UK: a research atlas and roadmap. Energy Policy 36(12):4383–4389 Thakur M, Hurburgh CR (2007) Quality of US soybean meal compared to the quality of soybean meal from other origins. J Am Oil Chem Soc 84(9):835–843 Thamizhpparithi Maari (2013) Cassava. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cassava.jpg. Retrieved on 04 Mar 2023 Tokel D (2021) Dünya pamuk tarımı ve ekonomiye katkısı. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 10(2):1022–1037 Ton Rulkens (2019). https://www.flickr.com/photos/47108884@N07/4324561945. Retrieved on 14 Feb 2023 Tugay (2007). https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/etae/Belgeler/EgitimBrosur/139ciftcibro.pdf Retrieved on 24 Jan 2023 USDA (2013). https://www.flickr.com/photos/usdagov/10583409706. Retrieved on 20 Feb 2023 Voegele (2021). https://biodieselmagazine.com/articles/2517550/usda-­predicts-­increase-­in-­ soybean-­oil-­use-­for-­biofuel. Retrieved on 15 Feb 2023 Volli V, Singh R, Shadangi KP, Shu C (2021) Suitability of oil seed residues as a potential source of bio-fuels and bioenergy. In: Liquid Biofuels, pp.  361–389. https://doi. org/10.1002/9781119793038 Wang S, Hastings A, Smith P (2012) An optimization model for energy crop supply. GCB Bioenergy 4(1):88–95 Wordpress, Blogspot A (n.d.). https://pxhere.com/en/photo/711396 Retrieved on 20 Mar 2023 Wordpress, Blogspot B (n.d.). https://pxhere.com/tr/photo/676680. Retrieved on 24 Feb 2023 World Development Report (2008) Biofuels: the promise and the risks. The World Bank, pp. 70–71 Yuan JS, Tiller KH, Al-Ahmad H et al (2008) Plants to power: bioenergy to fuel the future. Trends Plant Sci 13(8):421–429 Zahan KA, Kano M (2018) Biodiesel production from palm oil, its by-products, and mill effluent: a review. Energies 11(8):2132 Zegada-Lizarazu W, Monti A (2012) Are we ready to cultivate sweet sorghum as a bioenergy feedstock? a review on field management practices. Biomass Bioenergy 40:1–12

3

Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy Ali Hassan, Muhammad Kamran Qureshi, Babar Islam, and Muhammad Tanveer Altaf

Abstract

World energy production is dominated by the oils, natural gas, and coal which are also known as fossil fuels. These fossil fuels are the main cause of global warming as they emit more carbon and drive toward climate change issue. World energy production needs a transition from fossil fuels to green energy, and it is only possible with the production of bioethanol, biodiesel, and biohydrogen. Many countries have been producing green energy for the past two decades, and the demand for such energy is increasing with each passing year. Green energy is obtained from renewable sources and  is considered  safe for environment. Biotechnology had played a significant role in the development of bioenergy. By the use of biotechnological techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), Rt PCR, and microarray, metagenomic and proteomic identification of new microorganisms has been carried out which produce biofuels more efficiently. Similarly, genetic engineering also played a significant role in the production of large volume of biofuels. Genetic engineering techniques such as metabolic engineering, genome shuffling, CRISPR-Cas9, and gene overexpression have been utilized in the efficient production of biofuels. Genetic engineering had also

A. Hassan (*) · B. Islam Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan M. K. Qureshi Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan Center of Plant Systems Biology and Biotechnology, Plovdiv, Bulgaria M. T. Altaf Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Turkey © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_3

47

48

A. Hassan et al.

laid out the foundation of biofuel production from forestry leftovers. Similarly, besides biotechnology and genetic engineering, biorefineries are also vital for the efficient extraction of biofuels from feedstocks. It can be concluded that bioenergy is the future of world energy production, and both biotechnology and genetic engineering are the basic tools to enhance bioenergy production in the future; however, judicious use and ethical concerns of such technologies are also important in the efficient production of bioenergy. Keywords

Bioenergy · Biofuels · Biotechnology · Genetic engineering

3.1 Introduction The global energy landscape is changing rapidly, which is being determined by a combination of various factors such as economic growth and geopolitical tensions, climate change, and industrial innovations (Hu et al. 2022). Oils, natural gas, and coal which are also known as fossil fuels have long dominated the world for energy production; however, all these resources are now being challenged by other renewable energy sources including solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power. Moreover, all fossil fuels including coal and natural gas are under the influence of scarcity as well as environmental challenges. Till 2025, it has been reported that about 50% more fuel will be required to maintain the quality of life in underdeveloped countries (Paudel and Menze 2014; Ediger 2019). Sustainable energy resources are becoming the need of the day due to several reasons. As huge amount of greenhouse gases emits as a result of fossil fuel burning which led toward severe environmental consequences such as global warming which is the main cause of climate change. Therefore, to combat climate change, it is important to adopt low-carbon emitting energy sources (Liu et al. 2021). Many developed and underdeveloped countries are more reliant on energy imports, which might jeopardize their economic stability and energy security. It is important that countries must decrease their reliance on imported energy sources and should increase their energy security by establishing native renewable energy sources. Similarly, renewable and sustainable energy sources offer significant economic and social benefits, such as increased energy access, improved public health, and local job creation. Hence, the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources may promote the economic growth, improve social welfare, and enhance their overall quality of life (Paravantis and Kontoulis 2020). World energy transformation, from fossils to renewable once, could play an important role in meeting the global energy demands. Among major energy transformation systems, bioenergy systems which are also known as biofuels are the most important one. Biofuels have several environmental and social advantages, as biofuels are renewable and low-carbon emission energy sources that are readily transformed into usable energy which could be utilized at agriculture and industrial

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

49

Fig. 3.1  World biofuel production year 2016–2022 (Source: IEA, Biofuel production by country/ region and fuel type, 2016–2022)

levels. Therefore, such prerequisites of biofuels could pave their path toward industrial adaptability and may play a significant role in industrial and agricultural revolution (Röder and Welfle 2019). The demand and production of biofuels are being increased by each year worldwide (Fig. 3.1). Biofuels are produced from organic materials, which may include crop residues or waste materials. Since biofuels could be replenished more quickly as compared to fossil fuels, which take millions of years to develop and a lot of capital is required to mine such resources again. Biofuels could be utilized in sectors where fossil fuels are commonly used, including transportation sector, agriculture, and power generation. However, the success of biofuel production and its utilization is depending upon the construction of advanced biorefineries (Forsberg et  al. 2021). Biofuels have a lot of potential as a source of clean energy. Countries may improve their energy supplies and lower their carbon dioxide emissions by adopting biofuels. As many biofuels are generated from crop residues or specific crops developed for clean energy production including Jatropha, such adaptation toward bioenergy production could minimize the environmental pollution and capital investment in energy sector without threatening food and energy security, and biofuels can also improve the economic growth by creating new industries and strengthening rural economies (Saleem 2022). Biofuels have many types which are classified on the basis of raw material which is used in their production. These types include first-generation, second-generation, third-generation, and fourth-generation biofuels (Mahapatra et  al. 2021; Kumar et al. 2022). The first-generation biofuels are produced from food crops including maize and sugar cane, sugar beet, rapeseed, and wheat; therefore, first-generation biofuels are criticized for being a cause of food shortage along with higher food prices. Similarly, second-generation biofuels are produced from waste materials and crops other than food. Second-generation biofuels have much potential to reduce

50

A. Hassan et al.

the social and environmental impact of biofuels, as its production does not rely on food crops. Moreover, third-generation biofuels are produced from microorganisms including algae and marine plants. Biofuel which is being produced by using genetically engineered microorganisms such as algae, cyanobacteria and marine plants is more sustainable and efficient as compared to first- and second-generation biofuels, and such biofuel is known as forth-generation biofuel (Fig.  3.2). Biofuels have ­substantial potential as an alternative and renewable energy source; however, their production must be carefully managed to ensure that they are sustainable, economically viable, and environmentally friendly (Ali et al. 2022). Biotechnology has a significant role in the production of various biofuels. Biotechnology enables the efficient conversion feedstock or biomass which could be from any generation of biofuel into usable products like ethanol, biodiesel, and biohydrogen. Biofuel production is carried out using the process known as fermentation. In fermentation, microorganisms like bacteria and yeast break down feedstocks or biomass to produce ethanol, biodiesel, or other biofuels (Benevenuti et al. 2020). For efficient and sustainable biofuel production, biotechnological applications are being utilized. Such biotechnological applications are being utilized in the identification and development of new strains of microorganisms which could more efficiently break down feedstocks or biomass for biofuel production. Such microorganisms are also being genetically modified to optimize their metabolic pathways which could increase their biofuel production capabilities. Similarly, sustainable biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel which are being produced from the biological sources are significant solutions to manage the waste material of agricultural lands and other sectors (Zabermawi et al. 2022). It is important to develop new sources of biofuel production. Therefore, biotechnological applications are also being implemented in the development of new feedstocks (Popp et  al. 2014). Similarly, the combined usage of biotechnology and Biofuels Secondary Biofuels

Primary Biofuels Directly produced by burning wood, animal waste, forest and crop residues

1 generation (conventional biofuels) Source: starch, sugar, vegetable oil (corn, sugarcane, sugar beet, rapeseed, soybean, wheat) Produced via fermentation, distillation and transesterification Products: ethanol, butanol, propanol, biodiesel

2 generation Made of lignocellulosic crops (rice/wheat straw, wood, organic waste) Require thermochemical or biochemical pretreatment Produced via gasification or enzyme hydrolysis and fermentation Products: ethanol, syngas (a mixture of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and hydrocarbons)

3 generation Made of oil extracted from algae and seaweed Products: biodiesel, bioethanol, hydrogen

4 generation Made of bioengineered microalgae and cyanobacteria with enhanced ability of CO2 capture

Fig. 3.2  Biofuel generation (Ale et al. 2019; Alalwan et al. 2019; Mat Aron et al. 2020; Rodionova et al. 2022)

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

51

Bioenergy

Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Biological Hydrogen

Fig. 3.3  Types of bioenergy

genetic engineering protocols had led to the development of new crop species that are specifically designed for biofuel production; these crops include switchgrass and Jatropha. From these crops, large quantities of biomass could be produced by using optimum inputs like water and fertilizer (Babu et al. 2022). Biotechnology is playing a significant role in the development of second-generation biofuels, which include agricultural waste or forestry leftovers. Biotechnology had lead to the development of several enzymes which efficiently transform waste materials into usable products for biofuel production (Chukwuma et al. 2021). It can be concluded that biotechnology has important role in the production of biofuels at the industrial level. It enables to utilize more sustainable and efficient production methods of biofuels. Similarly, biotechnology offers a great potential for the production of clean energy which could significantly enhance the economic growth and help to combat environmental hazards and could be aimed to provide quality of life.

3.2 Types of Bioenergy There are several types of bioenergy or biofuels that can be produced from renewable biological sources. The most common types of biofuels include the following (Singh et al. 2022) (Fig. 3.3):

3.2.1 Bioethanol To produce bioethanol, fermentation of feedstocks including maize, sugarcane, sugar beet, switchgrass, and waste materials is carried out to produce sugars and starches which are then transformed into bioethanol (Malik et al. 2022). Bioethanol could be utilized as transportation fuel in commercial vehicles or in agricultural machinery. It could also be utilized as solvent in various industrial processes. Bioethanol could replace the conventional gasoline after blending due to its several chemical properties. These properties include its carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen ratios (C2H5OH). Besides, this can readily be soluble in various organic solvents

52

A. Hassan et al.

which make it easy to blend with traditional fuels. It has specific gravity of 0.79 along with vapor density of 1.59. Moreover, its boiling point is 78.4 °C which is less than traditional gasolines. Thus, all these chemical properties make it perfect for its usage as biofuel as such qualities of bioethanol facilitate the vaporization and initiate the ignition process (Pandiyan et al. 2019). Bioethanol has high octane ratings, and due to such property, it can enhance the engine performance when blended with gasoline. However, bioethanol is corrosive to some extent and may harm particular types of plastics, rubbers, and metals; therefore, it could harm the engine parts too (Sun and Wang 2014). Therefore, its corrosive nature should be kept in mind while designing the fuel systems. Thus, the abovementioned properties of bioethanol and its renewable nature along with less carbon dioxide emission make it a promising alternative against the traditional fuel systems for the use in transportation, agriculture, and industrial sectors.

3.2.2 Biodiesel Biodiesel is a renewable fuel made from biofuel crops, crop residues, forestry leftovers, vegetable oils, animal fats, and recycled cooking oil (Zaman et al. 2022). It could easily blend with the traditional diesel and are, thus, utilized as transportation fuel in diesel engines. Like bioethanol, biodiesel also has some specific properties which make it ideal for use in a blended form. However, it is important to note that chemical properties of biodiesel are based upon the type of feedstock that is utilized to produce the biodiesel. Usually, biodiesel is composed of fatty acid methyl esters (FAME), which are produced by reacting vegetable oils or animal fats with methanol (Borugadda and Goud 2012). Biodiesel usually has higher cetane number than regular diesel fuel. Cetane number determines the burning quality of diesel. Biodiesel has cetane number of 45–67, whereas cetane number of traditional biodiesel is 40–49. Therefore, burning and ignition quality of biodiesel are more efficient as compared to traditional diesel. Similarly, biodiesel has higher concentration of oxygen in it; so, it has good combustion power. Higher percentage of oxygen in biodiesel may reduce emissions of certain pollutants, including carbon monoxide and particulate matter (Yilmaz and Vigil 2014). Biodiesel has some limitations from its consumption point of view, as biodiesel has high flash point compared to traditional diesel, it can be difficult to burn up when there is an ignition source nearby. Similarly, poor cold flow characteristics are also associated with biodiesel which at low temperature might cause fuel gelling which is the main cause of filter clogging in winter (Leng et al. 2020). However, such challenges could easily be addressed by using biodiesel blends.

3.2.3 Biohydrogen Biohydrogen is another renewable energy which could be produced by different biological processes such as fermentation. It is usually composed of molecular

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

53

hydrogen (H2) gas. Biohydrogen is produced by either using dark or anaerobic bacterial culture with organic matter as a source of carbohydrates (Gopalakrishnan et  al. 2019). A variety of organic feedstocks, including agricultural wastes, food waste, and wastewater, could be utilized for the production of biohydrogen. However, purity and composition of biohydrogen depend upon the type of feedstock which is used to produce the gas. It is a highly flammable gas and could ignite easily. Burning of biohydrogen produces less carbon as compared to conventional hydrogen (Salic and Zelic 2022). Similarly, the production of biohydrogen requires less energy and resources as compared to conventional hydrogen. However, the disadvantage of biohydrogen is that it has lower energy contents and has low yield, and it could be corrosive to several materials due to presence of impurities (Karthic and Joseph 2012). Similarly, specialized transport systems and storage capabilities are required for the supply and storage of biohydrogen. Biohydrogen is environment friendly as it produces water instead of carbon monoxide when burned. Therefore, it has several applications in industrial and transport sectors specifically in the aviation sector. Moreover, it could be utilized in the production of electricity through fuel cells. It also has soil and water reclamation properties. Likewise, it could also be utilized as growth stimulant for microorganisms which break down the pollutants; thus, biohydrogen is regarded as the future fuel due to its wide applications (Limongi et al. 2021).

3.3 Biotechnological Approaches for Biofuel Production 3.3.1 Isolation of Enzymes from Microbial Sources 3.3.1.1 Amylase and Cellulase Enzymes Sources Amylase and cellulase are enzymes produced by a variety of organisms, including bacteria and fungi. Some sources of amylase and cellulase include Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus licheniformis, and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens as bacterial sources that produce amylase and cellulase (Sethi et  al. 2013; Luang-In et  al. 2019). Similarly, Aspergillus niger, Trichoderma reesei, and Penicillium funiculosum are some fungi that produce amylase and cellulase (Naher et al. 2021). Identification and Isolation of Enzymes from Microbial (Bacterial and Fungal) Sources The isolation of amylase and cellulase from microbial sources involves several steps: Identification of Bacteria and Fungi Producing Amylase and Cellulase

The first step is to identify microorganisms which produce the desired enzymes such as amylase or cellulase (Franco-Duarte et al. 2019). It could be done by sample collection from different microbes, including bacteria or fungus, and then culturing them on suitable media. However, genetically modified microbial sources are now

54

A. Hassan et al.

gaining importance for isolation and production of enzymes for bioenergy. The methodology for the molecular identification of amylase and cellulase producing bacteria is as follows. PCR Amplification of Specific Genes

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based amplification of specific genes is carried out by designing specific primers to the amylase or cellulase genes. These primers are then utilized in PCR to amplify homologous genes from a bacterial or fungi sample. These amplified samples could be sequenced and then compared with the already known sequences in a database to identify the bacterial or fungal species producing the specific enzymes of interest. In most cases, randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) DNA markers are utilized for the identification of specific genes linked with the enzyme production. Moreover, real-­ time PCR is now also being utilized for identification of enzyme-producing species by targeting specific 16S or 28S genes linked with the production of specific enzymes (Mitani et al. 2005; Taponen et al. 2009; Baker et al. 2016). Functional Gene Microarray

DNA or gene microarray is a technique which is used to identify the specific gene of interest. It is a collection of thousands of DNA fragments which are stored on a solid support, like a gel, in a microarray. Thousands of DNA probes of known sequences for specific genes are present in functional gene microarrays, and these probes hybridize to complementary segments when they are placed in a precise sequence. The detection of probe hybridization involves the use of fluorescent reporter molecules. For the identification of specific genes linked with amylase and cellulase production, bacterial or other species’ DNA is thereby hybridized to the chip of microarrays, and the presence of certain genes, such as those involved in amylase or cellulase synthesis, is highlighted with specific colors on microarrays (Gillespie 2016). Metagenomic Analysis

Metagenomic analysis is the genetic analysis of whole genome of a specific specie to determine the presence of genes of interest. Similarly, it could be utilized for the identification of genes in a complex bacterial community which are involved in the production of enzymes such as amylase and cellulase. Moreover, metagenomics is also utilized to collect the data on microbial diversity. It involves sequencing of DNA of a bacterial or any other specie sample, and the use of bioinformatic tool identification of genes involved in the production of these enzymes is done (Prayogo et al. 2020). Proteomic Analysis

Proteomic analysis includes identification and characterization of proteins which are expressed by a bacterial cell. Therefore, it could be utilized for the identification of proteins involved in amylase and cellulase production. After identification, these

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

55

proteins are compared with already known sequences of proteins which led to identification of several bacterial or fungal species which are capable to produce certain enzymes. By the use of genomics techniques including proteomics, several achievements have been unlocked in terms of genetic improvement for enzyme production in microorganism (Paes et al. 2022). Enzyme Screening Once the microorganisms have been isolated, they are screened for the production of amylase and cellulase enzymes. It could be done by using various methodologies like plate assays or enzyme activity assays. To observe enzyme activities, usually agar plates are used having proper substrate. By the use of agar plates, positive colonies of enzymes could be identified; however, the improvement of agar plate method is underway for the effective screening of enzymes (Suenaga et al. 2007; Uchiyama and Miyazaki 2009). Enzyme Production After an appropriate identification and screening of microbe involved in the production of specific enzyme, it is cultivated in enormous fermentation tanks to manufacture the enzymes at large scale. Enzyme manufacture uses fermentation techniques including submerged fermentation and solid-state fermentation (Maqtari et  al. 2019). To maximize the synthesis of enzymes, fermentation parameters (such as temperature, pH, and oxygen level) are adjusted. However, fermentation conditions are different for different enzymes. Cell Disruption After the completion of enzyme production by fermentation process, cells are harvested and disrupted to release the enzymes. It may be carried out by using mechanical or chemical methods. Cell disruption is usually carried out by the bead milling process which is a mechanical method (Gong and Bassi 2016). Enzyme Purification Afterward, the unpurified enzyme extract is refined by means of chromatography, filtration, or precipitation techniques. The aim of enzyme purification step is to obtain a pure enzyme, which involves separating the enzyme from other biological components. Typically, ammonium sulfate is used to precipitate material, which is then processed using centrifugation and filtering. (Ibraheem et al. 2017). Enzyme Characterization After successful purification, the enzyme is then characterized to determine its biochemical properties, such as its optimum pH and temperature, substrate specificity, and kinetic parameters (Sethi et al. 2016). (Figure 3.4 summarizes the steps involved in the isolation and production of specific enzymes for bioenergy production.

56

A. Hassan et al.

Identification of Microrganisms

Purification and Charaterization

PCR, Microarray Metagenomics Proteomics

Cell disruption

Enzyme Screening

Enzyme Production Fig. 3.4  Biotechnological approaches for the isolation and production of enzymes for bioenergy production

3.3.2 Microbial Fermentation and Enzyme Hydrolysis for the Production of Bioenergy 3.3.2.1 Bioethanol As for the production of bioethanol, feedstocks are the primary components. Bioethanol-producing feedstocks are divided into three generations. Such classification is made on the type of feedstocks like edible, nonedible, or algal based (Timothy et al. 2021). However, the basic steps of biofuel production are the same for all generations of feedstocks which include: 1 . Pretreatment of feedstocks 2. Hydrolysis and fermentation of biomass 3. Conversion of sugars to bioethanol via fermentation Some feedstocks require pretreatment conditions (i.e., lignocellulosic feedstock and algal biomass) to release fermentable sugars into the media. Without pretreatment, fermentation progress can be slowed due to limited availability of fermentable sugars for metabolism.

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

Feedstock Prepration

Grinding and Milling

Pretreatment

57

Fermentation and Hydrolysis

Separation and Dehydration Fig. 3.5  Production of bioethanol from first- and second-generation feedstocks

First- and Second-Generation Bioethanol Production First-generation bioethanol production entails the production of ethanol from the sugars and starches found in plants like maize, sugarcane, sugar beet, and wheat, whereas the second-generation bioethanol production refers to the process of producing bioethanol from nonfood sources, such as agricultural waste, forest residues, and energy crops like Jatropha and others. However, the process of bioethanol production is the same as for the first-generation feedstocks. Moreover, the main advantage of second-generation bioethanol is less competition with food production, which could help to alleviate concerns about food security (Kumar et al. 2022). The following are the primary steps involved in the production of bioethanol from firstand second-generation feedstocks (Amornraksa et al. 2020), (Fig. 3.5). Feedstock Preparation for Bioethanol Production It is the first step of bioethanol production. It involves crop harvesting, cleaning, and preparing to the stock. Grinding and Milling of Feedstock After preparation, feedstock biomass is break down by grinding, which is followed by milling. After milling, feedstocks are converted into sugars or starches. Pretreatment The starches or sugars obtained from grinding and milling are then converted into simple sugars by treating with specific enzymes or acids. For the production of bioethanol, biotechnologically isolated enzymes such as amylase and cellulase are used (Atitallah et al. 2019). Hydrolysis and Fermentation The simple sugars obtained from the pretreatment of starches and sugars are now fermented by yeast or bacteria to produce ethanol either by following submerged or solid-state fermentation.

58

A. Hassan et al.

Cultivation of Algae and Cyanobacteria

Lipids and Carbohydrates Extration

Fermentation

Filtration and Distilation

Fig. 3.6  Production of bioethanol from third-generation feedstocks

Separation and Dehydration After hydrolysis, distillation process is carried out to separate ethanol from the fermentation mixture. Distillation involves specific heating cycles which tend to evaporate the ethanol at once, and then condensing of vapors is hold to produce a concentrated ethanol solution. The concentrated ethanol solution is now dehydrated to remove any remaining water. After dehydration, pure fuel-grade ethanol is obtained.

3.3.2.2 Third Generation Bioethanol Production It describes the process of creating bioethanol utilizing cutting-edge technology that is intended to be more cost-effective, sustainable, and efficient than earlier generations of biofuel production. Third-generation bioethanol is produced from nonfood sources such as algae or cyanobacteria as opposed to first- and second-generation bioethanol, which depend on food crops or agricultural waste as feedstocks (Maliha and Abu-Hijleh 2022; Aslam et al. 2020). Third-generation bioethanol is often made in a multistep process. Initially, cyanobacteria or algae are cultivated in large bioreactors with the help of sunlight, carbon dioxide, and nutrients. Lipids or carbohydrates are produced when these microorganisms mature. These lipids or carbohydrates are taken out of the algae or cyanobacteria, and then they are fermented or put through various chemical processes to become ethanol. To raise its concentration and get rid of impurities, ethanol is finally filtered and distilled. For the breakdown of lipids and carbohydrates, enzymes such alpha amylase, cellulase, and pectinase are utilized (Sharma et  al. 2019). Basic steps for the production of bioenergy from first, second, to third generation are shown in (Fig. 3.6). 3.3.2.3 Biodiesel Biodiesel is a sustainable and renewable energy source which is produced from vegetable oils, animal fats, recycled cooking oil, and various types other feedstocks. The production process of biodiesel involves several steps, which are outlined below: 3.3.2.4 Feedstock Preparation First, any impurities or pollutants are removed from the feedstocks (vegetable oil, animal fat, or recycled cooking oil). The feedstock may need to be filtered or settled

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

59

to eliminate any moisture, dirt, or other debris before being examined for quality and the presence of free fatty acids (Linganiso et al. 2022).

3.3.2.5 Transesterification The feedstock must next be transformed into biodiesel. Feedstock conversion to biodiesel is carried out by a procedure known as transesterification. It involves the reaction of feedstock with an alcohol such as methanol or ethanol, in the presence of catalysts like sodium hydroxide or potassium hydroxide and cosolvents. In the transesterification process, alcohol is a crucial acyl acceptor. Fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) and glycerin are formed from the feedstock molecules during this process (Kapilan and Baykov 2014; Musa 2016). 3.3.2.6 Separation The mixture is allowed to settle when the transesterification reaction is accomplished. The biodiesel floats on top, while the glycerin sinks to the bottom. The glycerin would then be taken out and can be sold or utilized in other sectors. 3.3.2.7 Washing and Drying To get rid of any leftover contaminants or catalyst residues, the biodiesel is subsequently cleaned. Typically, water or a water-methanol solution is often used, which is followed by centrifugation and filtering. After the washing, the biodiesel is dried to eliminate any leftover water. 3.3.2.8 Storage and Distribution The biodiesel must then be distributed and stored before being used. Depending on the required fuel properties and local regulations, biodiesel and petroleum diesel can be mixed in a multitude ratio (Lim and Ouyang 2016). Biodiesel manufacturing is an easy procedure that may be carried out on a small or large scale. To guarantee the creation of high-quality biodiesel, some specific tools and knowledge are needed. Basic steps for the production of bioenergy from all feedstocks are shown in Fig. 3.7. 3.3.2.9 Biohydrogen Biotechnological approaches for the production of biohydrogen typically involve using microorganisms such as bacteria, archaea, or algae to produce hydrogen through fermentation or photosynthesis. Biohydrogen is produced by following methods (Fig. 3.8): Dark Fermentation It is possible to ferment organic material without light by utilizing bacteria such as Clostridium or Enterobacter. These bacteria break down or digest organic waste, including lignocellulosic biomass, carbohydrates, and municipal solid waste, into simpler compounds like sugars, which are then transformed into hydrogen and carbon dioxide. At that point, the hydrogen gas may be collected and made usable

60

A. Hassan et al.

Feed stock preparation First generation Edible stock Sugarcane, Soybean and Corn

Second Generation Non-Edible stock

Third generation Algal Mass

Jatropha, Casterbean and Crop residues

Algae

Transesterification Separation Washing and Drying Biodiesel storage and Distribution Fig. 3.7  Production of biodiesel from first, second, and third generation of feedstocks Fig. 3.8 Production process of biohydrogen by the use of fermentation and photosynthesis

Biohydrogen Fermentation

Dark Fermentation

Photo Fermentation

Photosynthesis

Algal Hydrogen Production

Bio Photolysis

(Kamran 2021). Examples of these materials include industrial wastewater, crop residues that contain sugar, and lignocellulosic biomass:

C6 H12 O6 + 2H 2 O → 2CH 3 COOH + 2CO 2 + 4H 2

Photo Fermentation In photo fermentation, bacteria such as Rhodobacter and Rhodopseudomonas use light energy to produce hydrogen through photosynthesis. The O2-sensitive nitrogenase enzyme is used by these microorganisms to break down a number of organic substrates, including organic acids such as acetic and malic acids along with fructose, glucose, and succinate. This enables the microorganisms to efficiently produce H2. Organic molecules, such as acetate, butyrate, and lactate, are broken down in

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

61

this anoxic process to produce light-sensitive gases like H2 and CO2. Bacteria split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen using light energy. The hydrogen is then collected and purified (Singh and Sarma 2022). Algal Hydrogen Production Algal hydrogen production process involves using algae to produce hydrogen through photosynthesis. Algae such as Chlamydomonas reinhardtii can be genetically engineered to produce more hydrogen, and the hydrogen could be harvested by removing the oxygen produced during photosynthesis. Bacteria use light as energy source and CO2 as feedstock followed by the production of NADPH which is utilized as an energy source for the production of hydrogen gas in the presence of O2 (Forestier et al. 2003). Biophotolysis The process of producing hydrogen through photosynthesis with the help of bacteria and algae and the utilization of solar energy is known as biophotolysis. During photosynthesis, algae produce oxygen, which hydrogen-producing bacteria like Rhodobacter may utilize to produce hydrogen. Similarly, hydrogenase enzymes are found in microalgae and cyanobacteria, which utilize sun energy to break water molecules (biophotolysis) and produce hydrogen without emitting carbon dioxide. However, there are significant drawbacks to biophotolysis, such as a complicated pathway, limited efficiency, and reliance on light, which eventually impact the production of hydrogen (Hallenbeck 2005). Modern-day biotechnological techniques have much potential for the production of biohydrogen. Therefore, by using such techniques, clean and green energy, it is now easy to predict for the future.

3.4 Genetic Engineering and Bioenergy Production Genetic engineering and biofuels are two different areas of research; however, the combination of both of these could help to solve the world’s energy problems and could reduce the impact of climate change, as in genetic engineering modifications in the genome of various prokaryotes (bacteria and other microorganisms) and eukaryotes (plants and animals) are made. Similarly, biofuels are generated from the crops plants or plants solely developed for the production of biofuels. Therefore, genetic engineering could play an important role in the production of bioenergy and could make it possible for the efficient use of plants and microorganisms to meet the world’s demand of clean and green energy (Lin et al. 2013). Genetic engineering could be utilized in the following way to improve the biofuel production.

3.4.1 Plant Biomass Yield Improvement In biofuel production, usually plant material is being utilized at large scale. Therefore, genetic modification of plants for maximum biomass production and its

62

A. Hassan et al.

easy digestibility are being improved by using genetic engineering. For example, genetic engineering techniques, such as tissue-specific gene expression, transcriptome analysis, and different gene-editing techniques, have been used to change the lignin profile in biofuel crops in order to lower production costs and increase biomass yield (Pazhany and Henry 2019).

3.4.2 Improving the Conversion of Plant Biomass into Biofuels In modern days, biofuels are being considered the need of the day to meet the demand of energy in future. Therefore, microorganisms such as yeast and several bacterial species are considered to be important to replace or improve the efficiency of fuel production from traditional feedstocks. Such microorganism has much potential to produce biofuels. Genetic engineering in such microorganisms has been carried out successfully to increase the biofuels. For example, several strains of yeast have been developed using genetic engineering in which genes such as GPD2 and GLT1 producing glycerol 3-phosphate dehydrogenase and glutamate synthase, respectively, were deleted which led to the production of more ethanol from plant sugars (Kong et al. 2007). Similarly, bacterial strains that have the ability to dissolve cellulose more efficiently have been also engineered and such stains can easily digest plant materials.

3.4.3 Reduced Environmental Impact Impacts of biofuel production on the environment could be minimized by the use of genetic engineering which could help in biofuel production by enabling the use of nonfood crops or waste materials. Algae and cyanobacteria have been genetically engineered to produce biofuels using sunlight and CO2, thus reducing the need for the use of arable land and freshwater resources. Genetically modified algae could be grown in seawater. Therefore, a lot of natural resources could be saved by utilizing genetically engineered microorganisms (Williams and Laurens 2010; Hoekman et al. 2012).

3.4.4 Sustainable Production Genetic engineering and molecular profiling of microorganisms could be utilized for the development of more sustainable production methods for biofuels (Yang et al. 2022). In the past, scientists had developed microbes which could utilize cheap and readily available lignocellulosic biomass as a feedstock for the generation of biofuels.

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

63

3.4.5 Genetic Engineering and Production of Bioethanol Genetic engineering has been used to develop microorganisms that are more efficient at producing ethanol, a biofuel that can be derived from plant biomass. Genetic engineering strategies that have been used to improve ethanol production in microorganisms are as follows:

3.4.5.1 Metabolic Engineering Metabolic engineering involves the modifications of metabolic pathways of microorganisms to improve their ability to produce ethanol. Metabolic engineering could redesign and improve the pathways of microorganisms to produce maximum biofuel (Luo et al. 2023). It is possible to add genes in microorganisms by the use of gene cloning techniques for ethanol-producing enzymes such as pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase. By including pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase, E. coli is being used to produce ethanol at an industrial scale (Yang et al. 2014). 3.4.5.2 Genome Shuffling Genome shuffling involves the creation of hybrid strains of microorganisms by shuffling the genomes of two or more strains. Genome shuffling is capable of producing such strains of microorganism which produce bioethanol more efficiently. For example, in bacteria Clostridium ragsdalei, genome shuffling techniques have been adopted to increase the production of bioethanol, and it is reported that about sevenfold more bioethanol has been obtained in genome shuffled Clostridium ragsdalei as compared to wild (Patankar et al. 2021). 3.4.5.3 CRISPR-Cas9-Based Genome Editing Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 are modern-­day genome-editing technique which is being utilized to make changes in the whole genome of the organism or to make precise changes in the specific genes controlling specific traits. Similarly, CRISPR-Cas9 also allows to add or remove the specific base sequences in the genome. Therefore, in biofuel production, CRISPR-­ Cas9 could play an important role in maximizing the production of bioethanol by adding gene of interest in the plant species. Besides genome editing, CRISPR-Cas9 is also being utilized for stabilizing microorganism’s metabolic pathways involved in bioethanol production. It has been reported that bioethanol production has been increased by utilizing CRISPR-Cas9 genome-editing technique in microorganisms, such as bacteria, fungus, and algae (Lakhawat et al. 2022). 3.4.5.4 Gene Cloning Gene cloning is a common molecular biological technique which is used to isolate and to develop various copies of a specific gene of interest. In biofuel production, gene cloning has been utilized to increase the bioethanol yield. By using gene cloning, genetic modification of lignin pathways has been carried out in switchgrass. In switchgrass, downregulation of caffeic acid 3-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene

64

A. Hassan et al.

was carried out which reduces the lignin content which increases its efficiency of bioethanol production. Similarly, cloning of gene encoding lignases was carried out for efficient degrading of lignin. Moreover, gene lipH2 encoding lipid peroxidase from Phanerochaete chrysosporium was cloned and multiplied and inserted in yeast using pPICZalpha vector where maximum activity of lipid peroxidase was observed which improved the ethanol production (Sugiura et al. 2009; Vanholme et al. 2010; Paudel and Menze 2014).

3.4.5.5 Genetic Engineering and Biodiesel Production Like bioethanol production, genetic engineering techniques have been also implemented in microorganisms to increase the biodiesel production. The following genetic engineering techniques have been utilized for maximizing the biodiesel yield: 3.4.5.6 Metabolic Engineering In metabolic engineering, the metabolic pathways of microorganisms are changed to enhance their capacity to synthesize fatty acid methyl esters (FAMEs), which are the main constituent of biodiesel. Genes encoding for the enzymes involved in fatty acid synthesis or the synthesis of fatty acid methyl ester may be added, while genes inhibiting the creation of FAME may be deleted by the use of metabolic engineering. Similarly, metabolic engineering has applied in over E. coli to improve keto acid pathway via push-pull and block technology (Choi et  al. 2012). Moreover, metabolic engineering has been carried out in E. coli, cyanobacteria, and yeast to improve tolerance to hydrolysis toxicity, substrate spectrum, and product yield (Joshi et al. 2022). 3.4.5.7 Gene Overexpression Gene overexpression is the technique of adding extra copies of the genes responsible for producing fatty acid methyl esters, in order to improve the production of biodiesel from microorganisms. More copies of the acetyl-CoA (ACC) gene are added into the genome of microorganisms like E. coli to increase the production of fatty acids; additional copies of the alcohol dehydrogenase gene could increase the production of FAMEs in algae. Similarly, in Synechocystis spp., successful transformation for the overexpression of acetyl-CoA (ACC) has been carried out which exhibited 3–6 times more lipid contents along with higher glucose contents which ultimately produce more biodiesel (Fathy et al. 2021). 3.4.5.8 CRISPR-Cas9-Based Genome Editing In order to maximize the production of biodiesel, CRISPR-Cas9 might be used to add or remove certain genes involved in the synthesis of FAME or to modify the microorganism’s metabolic pathways in a more appropriate way. Similarly, barley strain mutant (HvCOMT-1) was modified for its cell wall composition, saccharification, and fuel production using CRISPR-Cas9 technology. This strain produces 34% more glucose in fermentation process as compared to wild type (Lee et al. 2021).

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

65

3.4.6 Genetic Engineering and Production of Biohydrogen Biohydrogen is a renewable and green energy and genetic engineering techniques have been used widely to boost its production. One of the most commonly used microorganisms for biohydrogen production is the bacterium Escherichia coli. As E. coli is capable to produce hydrogen gas through the activity of its native hydrogenase enzyme, such enzyme is easily inhibited by oxygen. Therefore, several genetic engineering strategies have been developed and implemented to enhance the hydrogen production capacity of E. coli. About 70% biohydrogen recovery has been reported in genetically engineered E. coli (Bohnenkamp et al. 2021). Genetic engineering of E. coli for enhanced hydrogen production has involved the manipulation of its native hydrogenase enzyme; there are four types of hydrogenase enzymes in E. coli and among them, Hyd-1 and Hyd-2 are linked with hydrogen uptake and formulation; however, Hyd-1 is reported to be linked with hydrogen production (Kim et al. 2010). E. coli have been successfully engineered to overexpress its native hydrogenase enzyme, resulting in increased hydrogen production. In E. coli near about 50 gene and 20 distinct loci have been reported to be linked with hydrogen production. In Rhodobacter capsulatus, Fe-Fe hydrogenase genes have been introduced from Clostridium acetobutylicum resulting in improved hydrogen production (Wecker et al. 2017). Another approach to genetic engineering of microorganisms for biohydrogen production involves the modification of metabolic pathways. Such modifications could be achieved by changing the flux of existing pathways or by redirecting the pathways of specific enzymes. The change in the metabolic path of glycolysis has improved the hydrogen production in E. coli (Vignais et al. 2006). In addition to E. coli, other microorganisms have also been genetically engineered for biohydrogen production, including photosynthetic bacteria such as Rhodobacter sphaeroides and cyanobacteria such as Synechocystis sp. These microorganisms are particularly appealing for sustainable hydrogen production since they can manufacture hydrogen using light energy. In cyanobacteria, genetic engineering approaches have been used to bypass hydrogenase sensitivity to oxygen (Xu and Smith 2014). Similarly, by utilizing genetic engineering, oxygen sensitivity and electron transport pathways that compete with hydrogen-producing enzymes have been addressed in algae (Ghirardi et al. 2009).

3.4.7 Genetic Engineering and Ethical Considerations in Bioenergy Production Genetic engineering in biofuel production has raised several ethical and regulatory concerns that must be addressed to ensure safe and judicious use of this technology. The following are the key elements which should be considered while using genetic engineering in biofuel production:

66

A. Hassan et al.

3.4.7.1 Genetic Engineering and Ecosystem Safety The use of genetic engineering in biological systems raises several concerns including ecosystem disturbance and safety of other organisms. Therefore, regulatory agencies such as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) require extensive safety testing and risk assessment before genetically engineered organisms are released into the environment. WTO has set up the safety models, and such models have provided the basic guidelines for safety assessment of GM crop, and the Australian gene-regulating authority is following all guidelines given by WTO to promote the GM crops (Dibden et al. 2013). 3.4.7.2 Genetic Engineering and Ethical Concerns in Bioenergy Production Several ethical and moral concerns with respect to humans are linked with genetic engineering which is the main reason of less acceptance of genetically modified organisms. As several communities raise questions on the exploitation and commercialization of life and consider it against nature, therefore, adaptation toward genetically modified organisms is being opposed by these concerns. In terms of bioenergy, social acceptance of genetically modified algae might be raised which will make green energy production more difficult (Varela Villarreal et al. 2020). 3.4.7.3 Public Acceptance for Genetically Engineered Biofuels No doubt the introduction of genetic engineering techniques for the efficient production of bioenergy has revolutionized the energy production process, but the success of such technology is determined or depends upon the public acceptance. Such genetic modifications raise ethical and socioeconomic concerns, therefore, to address these concerns, regulatory agencies have developed various guidelines for the safe use of genetically engineered organisms in biofuel production. In the USA, genetically engineered organisms for biofuel production are regulated by several agencies, including the EPA, and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). These agencies require extensive testing and monitoring to determine the potential risks of a particular product to ensure the safety and efficacy of genetically engineered organisms in a particular area. Therefore, ethical and regulatory considerations must be carefully addressed to ensure that genetic engineering is used in a responsible and sustainable manner in biofuel production (National Academies of Science and Engineering 2017).

3.5 Biorefineries and Production of Bioenergy Biorefineries are the processing units which convert feedstocks into a wide range of valuable products such as bioethanol and biodiesel (Stuart and El-Halwagi 2012). Biorefineries, as compared to conventional refineries, use renewable resources such as plant material, agricultural waste, or forestry residues as a feedstock instead of fossil fuels. The idea behind biorefineries is to use a biomass feedstock to generate wide range of goods through various processing steps, just like conventional

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

Feedstock Preparation

Biomass Conversion

67

Byproduct Recovery

Fig. 3.9  General flowchart of biorefinery process for biofuel production

refineries produce a variety of products from crude oil. Biorefineries could be designed to produce a wide range of products, depending on the specific biomass feedstock and the desired end products. Depending upon the feedstocks which are used to isolate specific product, biorefineries are classified into various phases such as, phase I, II, and III.  To isolate bioethanol and biodiesel from first-generation feedstock, phase I biorefinery is used. Similarly, when carrying out multiple sets of process at a time, phase II biorefinery is used. Whereas phase III biorefinery is used when multiple feedstocks are used to produce various types of products, phase III biorefinery is further subdivided into groups and subgroups (Fernando et al. 2006; Sillanpaa et al. 2017; Wagemann and Tippkötter 2019; Konur 2021). Factors such as need for sustainable energy, less relying on fossil fuels, and demand for bio-based products are promoting the development of biorefineries. As biofuels developed from the biorefineries are reusable and less pollutant as compared to fossil fuels, such benefits of biofuels are important for the development of various types of biorefineries (Calvo-Flores and Martin-Martinez 2022).

3.5.1 Importance of Biorefineries in the Production of Biofuels By the use of appropriate conversion technologies, biorefinery is a sustainable method of producing diverse bioenergy products from different feedstocks. Several feedstocks including first generation, second generation, and third generation are converted into products such as bioethanol and biodiesel (Ubando et  al. 2020). Steps involve in the production of bioethanol and biodiesel are in Fig. 3.9 (Mutturi et al. 2014).

3.5.1.1 Feedstock Preparation/Pretreatment The preparation of the biomass feedstock for the production of biofuel is carried out at biorefineries. The first step includes preparing the feedstock for conversion into

68

A. Hassan et al.

biofuels. It is a step-by-step process which starts from cleaning and drying and ends at grinding of feedstock into a proper size.

3.5.1.2 Biomass Conversion/Hydrolysis Biorefineries are designed to utilize a variety of conversion technologies at a time to turn biomass feedstocks into biofuels. In this step, grinded feedstock is converted into ethanol by a process called fermentation, which is carried out with biological enzymes and hydrolysis. Similarly, microorganisms such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae, E. coli, cyanobacteria, or Aspergillus break down the fermented sugars to produce ethanol. Moreover, in biorefineries, feedstocks are also converted into biodiesel by a process known as transesterification, in which vegetable oils or animal fats are allowed to react with an alcohol to produce biodiesel. 3.5.1.3 Byproduct Recovery In biorefineries, several byproducts excluding the main products such as bioethanol or biodiesel are also formed. These byproducts include lignin and glycerol which are formed during the conversion of biomass feedstocks into biofuels. Lignin is formed during the production of ethanol, whereas glycerol is formed during transesterification for biodiesel production. These byproducts are recovered safely from biorefineries, and they are sold separately in the market where they are utilized in the production of several products. Similarly, biorefineries may produce multiple products from the same feedstock. Such biorefinery which is producing ethanol from maize could also produce corn oil at the same time which could be utilized either in food industry or for the production of biodiesel. Therefore, in order to produce biofuels, biorefineries are the core factor which transform feedstocks into useful products while reducing waste materials and optimizing efficiency at the same time.

3.6 Environmental and Economic Considerations of Bioenergy Fuels The following are the major environmental and economic concerns which are linked with the production of bioenergy:

3.6.1 Important Environmental Considerations of Biofuel Production (Jeswani et al. 2020) 3.6.1.1 Land Usage Bioenergy crops have a great charm in agriculture or other biosystems. Therefore, land usage effect on the environment is one of the key environmental issues with biofuels. However, it is also a more important consideration when countries are already dealing with food security issues, although it is predicted that in

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

69

underdeveloped nations, biodiversity losses along with deforestation and change in habitat may result due to wide cultivation of feedstocks for bioenergy production.

3.6.1.2 Less Pollutant Biofuels are more environmentally friendly and produce less pollution as compared to fossil fuels. But it is also important to keep a check on which type of feedstock is being utilized for the development of biofuels. Similarly, it is also important to monitor the existing production methodology efficiencies as injudicious use of external sources for the production of biofules may also lead to environmental constraints. 3.6.1.3 Water Usage for the Production of Biofuel Crops It is also an important concern when biofuel crops will be grown in arid or semiarid zones. Since much water will be utilized in the production of biofuel crops and most of the underdeveloped countries are dealing with water scarcity issues, therefore, judicious use of water is necessary for the production of biofuel crops. 3.6.1.4 Soil Degradation Soil degradation is an important factor in terms of biofuel crop production. As intensive cultivation of feedstocks for biofuel production could lead toward soil degradation, soil erosion, and nutrient depletion as biofuel crops require high inputs, all of these may cause to increase the cost of production for the current crop and for next season bioenergy crops along with other food crops which are grown on the same piece of land.

3.6.2 Economic Considerations 3.6.2.1 Cost of Production Cost is a core factor which limits the usage of any product at the market place. Therefore, in comparison to fossil fuels, bioenergy production from biofuels appear to be more expensive because bioenergy production requires more processing and advance methodologies and biorefineries which make it difficult to produce green energy. Although it is beneficial only when the government takes keen interest in bioenergy production by providing subsidies and farmer incentives and various loan schemes 3.6.2.2 Energy Security Energy security in underdeveloped countries could be improved by the use of biofuels. Many countries rely upon the fuel imports which put more burden on economy, therefore, biofuels are important alternative to fuel imports. However, political concerns and country policies could impact biofuel production prices. Furthermore, energy security of a country could be improved by putting emphasis on the research and development in the production of cost-effective feedstocks.

70

A. Hassan et al.

3.6.3 Economic Viability of Biofuel Production from Biotechnology The economic viability of biofuel production from biotechnology depends on several factors, which include feedstock costs, processing costs, and market demand.

3.6.3.1 Feedstock Costs and Biotechnology Feedstock cost, like cost of agricultural residues, energy crops, or municipal waste, is an important factor for economic production of biofuels. In most cases, feedstock cost depends on the factors such as location and their competition with food and feed crops. Therefore, feedstock costs may vary, and in some cases, the price of the feedstocks makes it impractical to produce bioenergy from biofuels. For example, third-generation biofuel feedstocks which need drying and further processing before using them in bioenergy production, hence, require more energy and capital for the production of green energy (Haas and Scott 2007). 3.6.3.2 Processing Costs of Feedstocks The feedstock processing into biofuels usually determines whether the production of biofuel is economically viable or not. In this scenario, biotechnology may offer many advantages in terms of reducing processing costs, improving efficiencies of biomass production, and its conversion into biofuel by the use of several enzymes for hydrolysis and fermentation process (Hahn-Hägerdal et al. 2008). 3.6.3.3 Market Demand and Public Interest Biofuel market is dominated by various factors such as government policies, fuel prices, and public awareness about benefits of biofuels over conventional fuels. It is a general economic fact that the price of feedstock will increase when there will be high demand of biofuels. Similarly, biofuel production is also limited by crude oil price. So, it is important to establish policies in favor of biofuels at the federal level to balance the production of biofuels, which could be achieved by changing the framework of current agricultural policies, implementing subsidies, and supports from the governments. The US government had implemented initiatives of the Energy Policy Act 2005 (EPA) to boost the production of biofuel. Therefore, by implementing such policies, they had set their target to produce 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. Similarly, Europe and Brazil are also on their way to boost the biofuel production to use it in the transport sector (Trostle 2011).

3.7 Future Prospects Bioenergy generation sources such as ethanol, biodiesel, and biohydrogen are an important area of research and development in biotechnology and genetic engineering. The characteristics of biofuel crops could be fabricated by the use of genetic engineering which will improve both efficiency and quality of bioenergy crops and their products. Genetic modification of plants and other microorganisms is now

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

71

more important as they have to grow and develop in a changing environment. Biofuels like bioethanol and biodiesel are now being produced from bacteria or algae which are now genetically engineered to gain maximum output. Therefore, it has now become more significant to develop such genetically modified sources of biofuel production. When the aim is to develop bioenergy from waste products like sewage and food waste and agricultural leftovers, it is the need of the day to develop new methods or techniques to gain maximum output, and it is now only possible with the use of biotechnology and genetic engineering. Such methods or techniques fulfil the criteria of bioenergy as sustainable energy source. To achieve the aim of clean and green energy, it is important to build modern biorefineries. Depending upon the feedstocks used in the generation of bioenergy, different types of biorefineries such as type I, II, or III are being utilized. Now, it is important to develop new methodologies to upgrade these existing biorefineries to meet the criteria of utilization of new-generation feedstocks to generate bioenergy. Besides generation of bioenergy, emphasis should be needed to store such bioenergies as they have much variations in terms of energy such as bioethanol, biodiesel, and biohydrogen. Therefore, it can be concluded that biotechnology and genetic engineering techniques are making great success in cost-effective and sustainable bioenergy generation. Therefore, it is important to carry out advance research to develop new sources of bioenergy development along with the modification of previously existing sources.

References Alalwan HA, Alminshid AH, Aljaafari HA (2019) Promising evolution of biofuel generations. Sub Rev Renew Energy Focus 28:127–139 Ale S, Femeena PV, Mehan S, Cibin R (2019) Environmental impacts of bioenergy crop production and benefits of multifunctional bioenergy systems. In: Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Academic Press, pp 195–217 Ali SS, Mastropetros SG, Schagerl M, Sakarika M, Elsamahy T, El-Sheekh M & Kornaros M (2022) Recent advances in wastewater microalgae-based biofuels production: A state-of-the-­ art review. Energy Reports, 8: 13253–13280. Amornraksa S, Subsaipin I, Simasatitkul L, Assabumrungrat S (2020) Systematic design of separation process for bioethanol production from corn Stover. BMC Chemical Engineering 2(1):1–16 Aslam A, Fazal T, Uz Zaman Q, Shan A, Rehman F, Iqbal J et al (2020) Biorefinery of microalgae for nonfuel products. In: Yousuf A (ed) Microalgae cultivation for biofuels production. Academic Press, pp 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-­0-­12-­817536-­1.00013-­8 Atitallah IB, Antonopoulou G, Ntaikou I, Alexandropoulou M, Nasri M, Mechichi T, Lyberatos G (2019) On the evaluation of different saccharification schemes for enhanced bioethanol production from potato peels waste via a newly isolated yeast strain of Wickerhamomyces anomalus. Bioresour Technol 289:121614 Babu SS, Gondi R, Vincent GS, JohnSamuel GC, Jeyakumar RB (2022) Microalgae biomass and lipids as feedstock for biofuels: sustainable biotechnology strategies. Sustainability 14(22):15070 Baker JC, Crumley RE, Eckdahl TT (2016) Laboratory exercises random amplified polymorphic DNA PCR in the microbiology teaching laboratory. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 8:391–396

72

A. Hassan et al.

Benevenuti C, Botelho A, Ribeiro R et al (2020) Experimental design to improve cell growth and ethanol production in syngas fermentation by clostridium carboxidivorans. Catalysts 10(1):59 Bohnenkamp AC, Wijffels RH, Kengen SW, Weusthuis RA (2021) Co-production of hydrogen and ethyl acetate in Escherichia coli. Biotechnol Biofuels 14:1–12 Borugadda VB, Goud VV (2012) Biodiesel production from renewable feedstocks: status and opportunities. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(7):4763–4784 Calvo-Flores FG, Martin-Martinez FJ (2022) Biorefineries: achievements and challenges for a bio-­ based economy. Frontiers in Chemistry 10 Choi YJ, Park JH, Kim T, Lee SY (2012) Metabolic engineering of Escherichia coli for the production of 1-propanol. Metab Eng 14:477–486 Chukwuma OB, Rafatullah M, Tajarudin HA, Ismail N (2021) A review on bacterial contribution to lignocellulose breakdown into useful bio-products. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18(11):6001 Dibden J, Gibbs D, Cocklin C (2013) Framing GM crops as a food security solution. J Rural Stud 29:59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.11.001 Ediger VŞ (2019) An integrated review and analysis of multi-energy transition from fossil fuels to renewables. Energy Procedia 156:2–6 Fathy W, Essawy E, Tawfik E, Khedr M, Abdelhameed MS, Hammouda O, Elsayed K (2021) Recombinant overexpression of the Escherichia coli acetyl-CoA carboxylase gene in Synechocystis sp. boosts lipid production. J Basic Microbiol 61(4):330–338 Fernando S, Adhikari S, Chandrapal C, Murali N (2006) Biorefineries: current status, challenges, and future direction. Energy Fuel 20(4):1727–1737 Forestier M, King P, Zhang L, Posewitz M, Schwarzer S, Happe T & Seibert M (2003) Expression of two [Fe]‐hydrogenases in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii under anaerobic conditions. European J Biochem 270(13): 2750–2758. Forsberg CW, Dale BE, Jones DS, Hossain T, Morais ARC, Wendt LM (2021) Replacing liquid fossil fuels and hydrocarbon chemical feedstocks with liquid biofuels from large-scale nuclear biorefineries. Appl Energy 298:117225 Franco-Duarte R, Černáková L, Kadam S et al (2019) Advances in chemical and biological methods to identify microorganisms—from past to present. Microorganisms 7(5):130 Ghirardi ML, Dubini A, Yu J, Maness PC (2009) Photobiological hydrogen-producing systems. Chem Soc Rev 38(1):52–61 Gillespie S (2016) Current status of molecular microbiological techniques for the analysis of drinking water. In: Molecular microbial diagnostic methods. Academic Press, pp 39–58 Gong M, Bassi A (2016) Carotenoids from microalgae: a review of recent developments. Biotechnol Adv 34(8):1396–1412 Gopalakrishnan B, Khanna N, Das D (2019) Dark-fermentative biohydrogen production. In: Biohydrogen. Elsevier, pp 79–122 Haas MJ, Scott KM (2007) Moisture removal substantially improves the efficiency of in situ biodiesel production from soybeans. J Am Oil Chem Soc 84(2) Hahn-Hägerdal B, Himmel ME, Somerville C, Wyman C (2008) Welcome to biotechnology for biofuels. Biotechnol Biofuels 1(1–4):197–204 Hallenbeck PC (2005) Fundamentals of the fermentative production of hydrogen. Water Sci Technol 52:21–29 Hoekman SK, Broch A, Robbins C, Ceniceros E, Natarajan M (2012) Review of biodiesel composition, properties, and specifications. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(1):143–169 Hu G, Yang J, Li J (2022) The dynamic evolution of global energy security and geopolitical games: 1995–2019. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(21):14584 Ibraheem SA, Malomo SO, Igunnu A (2017) Characterization of detergent-stable proteases isolated from Citrus sinensis fruit peel IEA (n.d.) Biofuel production by country/region and fuel type, 2016–2022. IEA, Paris. https:// www.iea.org/data-­a nd-­s tatistics/charts/biofuel-­p roduction-­b y-­c ountry-­r egion-­a nd-­f uel-­ type-­2016-­2022. IEA. Licence: CC BY 4.0

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

73

Jeswani HK, Chilvers A, Azapagic A (2020) Environmental sustainability of biofuels: a review. Proc R Soc A 476(2243):20200351 Joshi A, Verma KK, Rajput D, V., Minkina, T., & Arora, J. (2022) Recent advances in metabolic engineering of microorganisms for advancing lignocellulose-derived biofuels. Bioengineered 13(4):8135–8163 Kapilan N, Baykov BD (2014) A review on new methods used for the production of biodiesel. Petrol Coal 56(1) Karthic P, Joseph S (2012) Comparison and limitations of biohydrogen production processes. Res J Biotechnol 7(2):59–71 Kim JY, Jo BH, Cha HJ (2010) Production of biohydrogen by recombinant expression of [NiFe]hydrogenase 1 in Escherichia coli. Microb Cell Factories 9(1):1–10 Kong QX, Zhang AL, Cao LM, Chen X (2007) Over-expressing GLT1  in a gpd2 Δ mutant of Saccharomyces cerevisiae to improve ethanol production. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 75:1361–1366 Konur O (ed) (2021) Biodiesel fuels based on edible and nonedible feedstocks, wastes, and algae: science, technology, health, and environment. CRC Press Kumar R, Dhurandhar R, Chakrabortty S, Ghosh AK (2022) Downstream process: toward cost/ energy effectiveness. In: Handbook of biofuels. Academic Press, pp 249–260 Lakhawat SS, Malik N, Kumar V, Kumar S, Sharma PK (2022) Implications of CRISPR-Cas9 in developing next generation biofuel: a mini-review. Curr Prot Pept Sci 23(9):574–584 Lee JH, Won HJ, Hoang Nguyen Tran P, Lee SM, Kim HY, Jung JH (2021) Improving lignocellulosic biofuel production by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated lignin modification in barley. GCB Bioenergy 13(4):742–752 Leng L, Li W, Li H, Jiang S, Zhou W (2020) Cold flow properties of biodiesel and the improvement methods: a review. Energy Fuel 34(9):10364–10383 Lim MK, Ouyang Y (2016) Biofuel supply chain network design and operations. In: Environmentally responsible supply chains, pp 143–162 Limongi AR, Viviano E, De Luca M, Radice RP, Bianco G, Martelli G (2021) Biohydrogen from microalgae: production and applications. Appl Sci 11(4):1616 Lin H, Wang Q, Shen Q, Zhan J, Zhao Y (2013) Genetic engineering of microorganisms for biodiesel production. Bioengineered 4(5):292–304 Linganiso EC, Tlhaole B, Magagula LP, Dziike S, Linganiso LZ, Motaung TE et  al (2022) Biodiesel production from waste oils: a south African outlook. Sustainability 14(4):1983 Liu LY, Ji HG, Lü XF, Wang T, Zhi S, Pei F, Quan DL (2021) Mitigation of greenhouse gases released from mining activities: a review. Int J Miner Metall Mater 28:513–521 Luang-In V, Yotchaisarn M, Saengha W, Udomwong P, Deeseenthum S, Maneewan K (2019) Isolation and identification of amylase-producing bacteria from soil in Nasinuan community Forest, Maha Sarakham, Thailand. Biomed Pharmacol J 12(3):1061–1068 Luo Q, Ding N, Liu Y, Zhang H, Fang Y, Yin L (2023) Metabolic engineering of microorganisms to produce pyruvate and derived compounds. Molecules 28(3):1418 Mahapatra S, Kumar D, Singh B, Sachan PK (2021) Biofuels and their sources of production: A review on cleaner sustainable alternative against conventional fuel, in the framework of the food and energy nexus. Energy Nexus 4:100036 Maliha A, Abu-Hijleh B (2022) A review on the current status and post-pandemic prospects of third-generation biofuels. In: Energy systems, pp 1–32 Malik K, Sharma P, Yang Y et al (2022) Lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol: insight into the advanced pretreatment and fermentation approaches. Ind Crop Prod 188:115569 Maqtari QA, Waleed AA, Mahdi AA (2019) Microbial enzymes produced by fermentation and their applications in the food industry-a review. Int J Agric Innov Res 8(1):2319–1473 Mat Aron NS, Khoo KS, Chew KW, Show PL, Chen WH, Nguyen THP (2020) Sustainability of the four generations of biofuels–a review. Int J Energy Res 44(12):9266–9282 Mitani N, Koizumi A, Sano R, Masutani T, Murakawa K, Mikasa K, Okamoto Y (2005) Molecular typing of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by PCR-RFLP and its usefulness in an epidemiological study of an outbreak. Jpn J Infect Dis 58(4):250

74

A. Hassan et al.

Muhammad K (2021) Bioenergy in Renewable energy conversion system. Academic press. 243–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-­0-­12-­823538-­6.00002-­6 Musa IA (2016) The effects of alcohol to oil molar ratios and the type of alcohol on biodiesel production using transesterification process. Egypt J Pet 25(1):21–31 Mutturi S, Palmqvist B, Lidén G (2014) Developments in bioethanol fuel-focused biorefineries. In: Advances in biorefineries. Woodhead Publishing, pp 259–302 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2017) Preparing for future products of biotechnology. National Academies Press Naher L, Fatin SN, Sheikh MAH, Azeez LA, Siddiquee S, Zain NM, Karim SMR (2021) Cellulase enzyme production from filamentous fungi Tricoderma  Trichoderma reesei and Aspergillus awamori in submerged fermentation with rice straw. J Fungi 7(10): 868 Paes BC, Paes OA, Lobo WV, Barros SDS, de Freitas FA (2022) Omics in biofuel production: a sustainable approach. In: Omics insights in environmental bioremediation. Singapore, Springer Nature Singapore, pp 515–541 Pandiyan K, Singh A, Singh S, Saxena AK, Nain L (2019) Technological interventions for utilization of crop residues and weedy biomass for second generation bio-ethanol production. Renew Energy 132:723–741 Paravantis JA, Kontoulis N (2020) Energy security and renewable energy: a geopolitical perspective. In: Renewable energy-resources, challenges and applications. IntechOpen Patankar S, Dudhane A, Paradh AD, Patil S (2021) Improved bioethanol production using genome-­ shuffled Clostridium ragsdalei (DSM 15248) strains through syngas fermentation. Biofuels 12(1):81–89 Paudel S & Menze MA (2014) Genetic engineering, a hope for sustainable biofuel production. Int J of Environ, 311. Pazhany AS, Henry RJ (2019) Genetic modification of biomass to alter lignin content and structure. Ind Eng Chem Res 58(35):16190–16203 Popp J, Lakner Z, Harangi-Rákos M, Fari M (2014) The effect of bioenergy expansion: food, energy, and environment. Renew Sust Energ Rev 32:559–578 Prayogo FA, Budiharjo A, Kusumaningrum HP, Wijanarka W, Suprihadi A, Nurhayati N (2020) Metagenomic applications in exploration and development of novel enzymes from nature: a review. J Genet Eng Biotechnol 18(1):1–10 Röder M, Welfle A (2019) Bioenergy. In: Managing global warming. Academic Press, pp 379–398 Rodionova MV, Bozieva AM, Zharmukhamedov SK et  al (2022) A comprehensive review on lignocellulosic biomass biorefinery for sustainable biofuel production. Int J Hydrog Energy 47(3):1481–1498 Saleem M (2022) Possibility of utilizing agriculture biomass as a renewable and sustainable future energy source. Heliyon, e08905 Salic A, Zelic B (2022) A game changer: microfluidic technology for enhancing biohydrogen production—small size for great performance. Energies 15(19):7065 Sethi S, Datta A, Gupta BL, Gupta S (2013) Optimization of cellulase production from bacteria isolated from soil. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2013 Sethi BK, Nanda PK, Sahoo S, Sena S (2016) Characterization of purified α-amylase produced by aspergillus terreus NCFT 4269.10 using pearl millet as substrate. Cogent Food Agric 2(1):1158902 Sharma P, Sharma N, Sharma N (2019) Optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis conditions for saccharification of carbohydrates in algal biomass: an integral walk for bioethanol production. Pharma Innov J 8:461–466 Sillanpaa M, Ncibi MC, Sillanpää ME (2017) Sustainable bioeconomy. Springer, London, pp 141–183 Singh N, Sarma S (2022) Biological routes of hydrogen production: a critical assessment. In: Handbook of biofuels. Academic Press, pp 419–434 Singh S, Sarkar P, Dutta K (2022) Bioenergy: an overview of bioenergy as a sustainable and renewable source of energy. In: Bioprospecting of microbial diversity, pp 483–502

3  Biotechnological Approaches for the Production of Bioenergy

75

Stuart PR, El-Halwagi MM (eds) (2012) Integrated biorefineries: design, analysis, and optimization. CRC Press Suenaga H, Ohnuki T, Miyazaki K (2007) Functional screening of a metagenomic library for genes involved in microbial degradation of aromatic compounds. Environ Microbiol 9(9):2289–2297 Sugiura T, Yamagishi K, Kimura T, Nishida T, Kawagishi H & Hirai H (2009) Cloning and homologous expression of novel lignin peroxidase genes in the white-rot fungus Phanerochaete sordida YK-624. BioSci Biotech Biochem 73(8): 1793–1798 Sun J, Wang Y (2014) Recent advances in catalytic conversion of ethanol to chemicals. ACS Catal 4(4):1078–1090 Taponen S, Salmikivi L, Simojoki H, Koskinen MT, Pyörälä S (2009) Real-time polymerase chain reaction-based identification of bacteria in milk samples from bovine clinical mastitis with no growth in conventional culturing. J Dairy Sci 92(6):2610–2617 Timothy TJ, Wiens DJ, Reaney MJ (2021) Production of bioethanol—a review of factors affecting ethanol yield. Fermentation 7(4):268 Trostle R (2011) Why have food commodity prices risen again? Diane Publishing Ubando AT, Felix CB, Chen WH (2020) Biorefineries in circular bioeconomy: a comprehensive review. Bioresour Technol 299:122585 Uchiyama T, Miyazaki K (2009) Functional metagenomics for enzyme discovery: challenges to efficient screening. Curr Opin Biotechnol 20(6):616–622 Vanholme R, Demedts B, Morreel K, Ralph J and Boerjan W (2010) Lignin Biosynthesis and Structure. Plant Physiol 153: 895–905. Varela Villarreal J, Burgués C, Rösch C (2020) Acceptability of genetically engineered algae biofuels in Europe: opinions of experts and stakeholders. Biotechnol Biofuels 13:1–21 Vignais PM, Magnin JP, Willison JC (2006) Increasing biohydrogen production by metabolic engineering. Int J Hydrog Energy 31(11):1478–1483 Wagemann K, Tippkötter N (2019) Biorefineries: a short introduction. In: Biorefineries, pp 1–11 Wecker MS, Beaton SE, Chado RA, Ghirardi ML (2017) Development of a Rhodobacter capsulatus self-reporting model system for optimizing light-dependent,[FeFe]-hydrogenase-driven H2 production. Biotechnol Bioeng 114(2):291–297 Williams PJ, Laurens LM (2010) Microalgae as biodiesel and biomass feedstocks: review and analysis of the biochemistry, energetic and economics. Energy Environ Sci 3:554–590. https:// doi.org/10.1039/b924978h Xu, Q., & Smith, H.  O. (2014). U.S.  Patent No. 8,859,744. U.S.  Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC Yang M, Li X, Bu C et al (2014) Pyruvate decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase overexpression in Escherichia coli resulted in high ethanol production and rewired metabolic enzyme networks. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 30:2871–2883 Yang Y, Chaffin TA, Ahkami AH, Blumwald E, Stewart CN (2022) Plant synthetic biology innovations for biofuels and bioproducts. Trends Biotechnol Yilmaz N, Vigil FM (2014) Potential use of a blend of diesel, biodiesel, alcohols and vegetable oil in compression ignition engines. Fuel 124:168–172 Zabermawi NM, Alsulaimany FA, El-Saadony MT, El-Tarabily KA (2022) New eco-friendly trends to produce biofuel and bioenergy from microorganisms: an updated review. Saudi J Biol Sci Zaman F, Ishaq MW, Ul-Haq N, Rahman WU, Ali MM, Ahmed F, Haq AU (2022) Effect of different parameters on catalytic production of biodiesel from different oils. ChemBioEng Rev 9(1):6–20

4

Integrated OMIC Approaches for Bioenergy Crops Ahmad Mahmood, Muhammad Imran, Muhammad Usman Jamshaid, Umair Riaz, Muhammad Arif, Wazir Ahmed, Tanveer Ul Haq, Muhammad Asif Shahzad, Abd Ur Rehman, Ali Hamed, Hasan Riaz, and Muhammad Arslan Khan Abstract

This book chapter discusses the application of integrated OMIC approaches for bioenergy crops. OMIC technologies such as genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics have been increasingly used to identify genetic factors and metabolic pathways that play important roles in the growth and development of bioenergy crops. By integrating multiple OMIC datasets, researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying plant growth and development as well as responses to environmental stresses. The chapter provides an overview of the latest advances in integrated OMIC approaches for bioenergy crops, including the development of high-throughput sequencing platforms, bioinformatic tools, and computational models for data analysis. It also highlights some of the key challenges in applying these approaches, such as data integration and interpretation and the need for further validation of findings through experimental approaches. Furthermore, the chapter showcases some case studies that illustrate the use of A. Mahmood (*) · M. Imran · M. U. Jamshaid · U. Riaz · M. Arif · W. Ahmed · T. U. Haq Department of Soil and Environmental Sciences, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan e-mail: [email protected] M. A. Shahzad Department of Agronomy, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan A. U. Rehman Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan A. Hamed Project Officer, ACIAR Pulses Project, MNS-University of Agriculture, Multan, Pakistan H. Riaz · M. A. Khan Institute of Plant Protection, Multan, Pakistan © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_4

77

78

A. Mahmood et al.

integrated OMIC approaches in bioenergy crop research. These case studies cover a range of bioenergy crops, including switchgrass, corn, and sugarcane, and highlight the potential of OMIC approaches to improve plant growth, yield, and quality as well as to enhance stress tolerance and resilience. Overall, this book chapter provides an in-depth exploration of the current state of integrated OMIC approaches for bioenergy crops and highlights their potential for advancing the development of sustainable bioenergy production systems.

4.1 Introduction Bioenergy crops are a promising source of renewable energy that can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote sustainable development (Lemus and Lal 2005). These crops are specifically grown for energy purposes, such as producing biofuels, biopower, and biomaterials. Bioenergy crops can be classified into three categories: lignocellulosic crops, oilseed crops, and sugar crops (Koçar and Civaş 2013; Valentine et al. 2012). Lignocellulosic crops are characterized by their high biomass content, while oilseed crops and sugar crops are primarily grown for their oil and sugar content, respectively (Frigon and Guiot 2010; Yuan et al. 2008). As the global demand for energy continues to rise, there is an urgent need to explore alternative sources of energy that are sustainable and environmentally friendly. Bioenergy crops, which are specifically grown for energy production, are emerging as a promising solution to this problem. These crops have the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help transition away from fossil fuels. However, developing efficient and cost-effective bioenergy crops is not without its challenges (Chung 2013; Hassan et al. 2019; Misra et al. 2016; Stamenković et al. 2020). In recent years, integrated OMIC approaches have been employed to address these challenges (Misra et al. 2019). OMIC refers to the study of the complete set of molecules within a biological system, including genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics (Gomez-Cabrero et  al. 2014; Vilanova and Porcar 2016). By integrating these approaches, researchers are able to gain a comprehensive understanding of the complex biological systems involved in bioenergy crop production and develop strategies to optimize crop yields and energy output (Deshmukh et al. 2014; Misra et al. 2019). Bioenergy crops are specific types of plants that are grown specifically for the purpose of producing energy. These crops include crops such as switchgrass, Miscanthus, Sorghum, and corn (Reid et  al. 2020; Slade et  al. 2014). Bioenergy crops are an important component of sustainable energy production because they can be grown on land that is unsuitable for food crops, reducing competition for land and resources. Bioenergy crops have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change by replacing fossil fuels. Additionally, bioenergy crops have the potential to provide rural economic development by creating jobs in the farming and energy production sectors.

4  Integrated OMIC Approaches for Bioenergy Crops

79

The world’s demand for energy is expected to continue to grow in the coming decades. However, the current reliance on fossil fuels is unsustainable, as it contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. As a result, there is a critical need for more sustainable and environmentally friendly sources of energy. Bioenergy crops offer a promising alternative to fossil fuels, as they can be grown sustainably and have the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As the world works to transition away from fossil fuels, bioenergy crops are emerging as an important part of the solution. Bioenergy crops can be used to produce a variety of biofuels, including ethanol, biodiesel, and biogas. These fuels can be used to replace fossil fuels in transportation, heating, and electricity production. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, bioenergy crops can also help to create jobs and stimulate economic growth in rural communities. Despite the potential benefits of bioenergy crops, developing efficient and cost-­ effective crops is not without its challenges. One of the primary challenges is developing crops that can thrive in a variety of environmental conditions, including poor soil quality, drought, and temperature fluctuations (Mouratiadou et  al. 2020). Another challenge is developing crops that are resistant to pests and diseases, without relying on harmful pesticides and herbicides. Finally, developing cost-effective methods for harvesting, transporting, and processing bioenergy crops is essential for making bioenergy production economically viable. In recent years, integrated OMIC approaches have been employed to address the challenges associated with developing efficient and cost-effective bioenergy crops. By integrating genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, researchers are able to gain a comprehensive understanding of the complex biological systems involved in bioenergy crop. In this book chapter, we will explore the concept of bioenergy crops and their importance in addressing the need for sustainable energy sources. We will discuss the challenges faced in developing efficient and cost-effective bioenergy crops and the potential of integrated OMIC approaches to address these challenges. Finally, we will highlight some of the recent advances in this field and the promising avenues for future research.

4.2 Overview of OMIC Approaches OMIC approaches involve the comprehensive analysis of various biological molecules, including DNA, RNA, proteins, and metabolites, to gain insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying plant growth and development. These approaches have revolutionized the field of plant biology by enabling the simultaneous analysis of multiple molecules and providing a systems-level understanding of plant processes. OMIC approaches can be broadly classified into genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics. Genomics involves the study of the entire genome of an organism, including the identification of genes and their functions. The availability of genome sequences for

80

A. Mahmood et al.

several bioenergy crops, such as switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) (Casler et  al. 2011; Sharma et al. 2012) and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) (Riaño-Pachón and Mattiello 2017; Thirugnanasambandam et al. 2018), has enabled the identification of key genes and pathways associated with important traits. Transcriptomics involves the analysis of the entire transcriptome of an organism, including the identification of all the expressed genes and their levels of expression. Transcriptomics has been used to identify genes and pathways associated with biomass accumulation in bioenergy crops such as switchgrass and Miscanthus (Miscanthus sp.) (Ma et al. 2012; Miao et al. 2021; Sheng et al. 2021). Proteomics involves the study of the entire proteome of an organism, including the identification of all the proteins and their functions. Proteomics has been used to identify proteins associated with stress response in bioenergy crops such as maize (Zea mays) (Lu et  al. 2015; Ramos-Madrigal et  al. 2016) and poplar (Populus trichocarpa) (Brunner and Nilsson 2004; Ma et al. 2019). Metabolomics involves the study of the entire metabolome of an organism, including the identification of all the metabolites and their functions. Metabolomics has been used to identify metabolites associated with biomass accumulation in bioenergy crops such as switchgrass and maize.

4.3 Integrated OMIC Approaches Integrated OMIC approaches involve the simultaneous analysis of multiple OMIC datasets to gain a systems-level understanding of plant processes. These approaches can provide insights into the interactions between genes, proteins, and metabolites and help identify key genes and pathways associated with important traits (Table  4.1). Integrated OMIC approaches have been used in bioenergy crops to identify candidate genes for biomass accumulation, stress tolerance, and nutrient use efficiency. For example, an integrated OMIC approach involving transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics was used to identify key genes and pathways associated with biomass accumulation in switchgrass. The study identified 10,525 differentially expressed genes, 583 differentially expressed proteins, and 92 differentially accumulated metabolites between high and low biomass switchgrass genotypes (Tiedge et al. 2022). The integrated analysis of these datasets identified several candidate genes and pathways associated with biomass accumulation, including those involved in lignin biosynthesis, carbohydrate metabolism, and nitrogen assimilation. Similarly, an integrated transcriptomic and metabolomic approach was used to identify candidate genes and metabolites associated with drought tolerance in maize. The study identified 1072 differentially expressed genes and 92 differentially accumulated metabolites in response to drought stress (Jiang et al. 2022). The integrated analysis of these datasets identified several candidate genes and metabolites associated with drought tolerance, including those involved in the synthesis of abscisic acid, proline, and sugars.

81

4  Integrated OMIC Approaches for Bioenergy Crops Table 4.1  Instances of use of OMIC approaches in bioenergy crops Bioenergy plant Poplar Sugarcane

Technique used Whole genome sequencing Transcriptomics

Arabidopsis thaliana

Transcriptomics

Maize

RNA sequencing

Sorghum

Proteomics

Arundo donax Switchgrass

Transcriptomics

Ginkgo biloba Algae

Integrated omics (metabolomic, proteomic) Integrated omics (metabolomic, transcriptomics) Integrated omics (metabolomic, proteomic)

Purpose of the study Identify genes associated with biomass production Identify genes associated with sucrose accumulation To identify the genes and pathways involved in response to abiotic stress in bioenergy crops Identification of genes involved in biomass production Identification of proteins involved in drought tolerance Exploration of genomic resources

References Tuskan et al. (2006) Cardoso-Silva et al. (2014) Kilian et al. (2007) Li et al. (2010)

Assessment of metabolic and protein changes

Hu et al. (2006) Sablok et al. (2014) Poudel et al. (2017)

Investigation of flavonoid biosynthesis

Meng et al. (2019)

Examination of triacylglycerol biosynthetic pathways

Guarnieri et al. (2011)

Another example of integrated OMIC approaches in bioenergy crops is the identification of genes and pathways associated with nutrient use efficiency. A study in soybean (Glycine max) used an integrated approach involving genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics to identify candidate genes and pathways associated with nitrogen use efficiency (Cao et al. 2022). The study identified several candidate genes involved in nitrogen assimilation, including those encoding nitrate transporters, ammonium transporters, and nitrogen assimilation enzymes. The integrated analysis of these datasets also identified several metabolites associated with nitrogen use efficiency, including amino acids and organic acids.

4.4 Challenges and Future Directions Despite the promise of integrated OMIC approaches for bioenergy crops, there are several challenges that need to be addressed. One of the main challenges is the integration of large and complex datasets. The analysis of OMIC datasets involves the generation of vast amounts of data, which can be challenging to integrate and analyze. Furthermore, the interpretation of these datasets requires advanced computational tools and expertise. Another challenge is the need for high-quality and standardized data. The quality of OMIC datasets can vary depending on the experimental design, sample

82

A. Mahmood et al.

preparation, and sequencing technologies used. Therefore, it is important to ensure that the data are of high quality and standardized across different experiments and platforms. Finally, there is a need for functional validation of candidate genes and pathways identified through integrated OMIC approaches. The identification of candidate genes and pathways is an important step in understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying important traits in bioenergy crops. However, functional validation of these candidates is necessary to confirm their roles in plant growth and development and to develop new cultivars with improved traits.

4.5 Conclusion In conclusion, integrated OMIC approaches provide a powerful tool for the identification of key genes and pathways associated with important traits in bioenergy crops. These approaches enable a systems-level understanding of plant processes and can provide insights into the interactions between genes, proteins, and metabolites. Despite the challenges associated with the integration and interpretation of large and complex datasets, integrated OMIC approaches hold promise for the development of high-yielding cultivars with improved stress tolerance and nutrient use efficiency.

References Brunner AM, Nilsson O (2004) Revisiting tree maturation and floral initiation in the poplar functional genomics era. New Phytol 164:43–51 Cao P, Zhao Y, Wu F, Xin D, Liu C, Wu X, Lv J, Chen Q, Qi Z (2022) Multi-omics techniques for soybean molecular breeding. Int J Mol Sci 23:4994 Cardoso-Silva CB, Costa EA, Mancini MC, Balsalobre TWA, Canesin LEC, Pinto LR, Carneiro MS, Garcia AAF, de Souza AP, Vicentini R (2014) De novo assembly and transcriptome analysis of contrasting sugarcane varieties. PLoS One 9:e88462 Casler MD, Tobias CM, Kaeppler SM, Buell CR, Wang ZY, Cao P, Schmutz J, Ronald P (2011) The switchgrass genome: tools and strategies. Plant Genome 4 Chung JN (2013) Grand challenges in bioenergy and biofuel research: engineering and technology development, environmental impact, and sustainability, vol 1. Frontiers Media SA, p 4 Deshmukh R, Sonah H, Patil G, Chen W, Prince S, Mutava R, Vuong T, Valliyodan B, Nguyen HT (2014) Integrating omic approaches for abiotic stress tolerance in soybean. Front Plant Sci 5:244 Frigon JC, Guiot SR (2010) Biomethane production from starch and lignocellulosic crops: a comparative review. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 4:447–458 Gomez-Cabrero D, Abugessaisa I, Maier D, Teschendorff A, Merkenschlager M, Gisel A, Ballestar E, Bongcam-Rudloff E, Conesa A, Tegnér J (2014) Data integration in the era of omics: current and future challenges. BMC Syst Biol 8:1–10 Guarnieri MT, Nag A, Smolinski SL, Darzins A, Seibert M, Pienkos PT (2011) Examination of triacylglycerol biosynthetic pathways via De Novo transcriptomic and proteomic analyses in an Unsequenced microalga. PLoS One 6:e25851

4  Integrated OMIC Approaches for Bioenergy Crops

83

Hassan SS, Williams GA, Jaiswal AK (2019) Moving towards the second generation of lignocellulosic biorefineries in the EU: drivers, challenges, and opportunities. Renew Sust Energ Rev 101:590–599 Hu H, Dai M, Yao J, Xiao B, Li X, Zhang Q, Xiong L (2006) Overexpressing a NAM, ATAF, and CUC (NAC) transcription factor enhances drought resistance and salt tolerance in rice. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:12987–12992 Jiang Z, Zhang H, Jiao P, Wei X, Liu S, Guan S, Ma Y (2022) The integration of metabolomics and transcriptomics provides new insights for the identification of genes key to auxin synthesis at different growth stages of maize. Int J Mol Sci 23:13195 Kilian J, Whitehead D, Horak J, Wanke D, Weinl S, Batistic O, D’Angelo C, Bornberg-Bauer E, Kudla J, Harter K (2007) The AtGenExpress global stress expression data set: protocols, evaluation and model data analysis of UV-B light, drought and cold stress responses. Plant J 50:347–363 Koçar G, Civaş N (2013) An overview of biofuels from energy crops: current status and future prospects. Renew Sust Energ Rev 28:900–916 Lemus R, Lal R (2005) Bioenergy crops and carbon sequestration. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:1–21 Li P, Ponnala L, Gandotra N, Wang L, Si Y, Tausta SL, Kebrom TH, Provart N, Patel R, Myers CR, Reidel EJ, Turgeon R, Liu P, Sun Q, Nelson T, Brutnell TP (2010) The developmental dynamics of the maize leaf transcriptome. Nat Genet 42:1060–1067 Lu F, Romay MC, Glaubitz JC, Bradbury PJ, Elshire RJ, Wang T, Li Y, Li Y, Semagn K, Zhang X (2015) High-resolution genetic mapping of maize pan-genome sequence anchors. Nat Commun 6:1–8 Ma X-F, Jensen E, Alexandrov N, Troukhan M, Zhang L, Thomas-Jones S, Farrar K, Clifton-­ Brown J, Donnison I, Swaller T (2012) High resolution genetic mapping by genome sequencing reveals genome duplication and tetraploid genetic structure of the diploid Miscanthus sinensis. PLoS One 7:e33821 Ma J, Wan D, Duan B, Bai X, Bai Q, Chen N, Ma T (2019) Genome sequence and genetic transformation of a widely distributed and cultivated poplar. Plant Biotechnol J 17:451–460 Meng J, Wang B, He G, Wang Y, Tang X, Wang S, Ma Y, Fu C, Chai G, Zhou G (2019) Metabolomics integrated with transcriptomics reveals redirection of the phenylpropanoids metabolic flux in Ginkgo biloba. J Agric Food Chem 67:3284–3291 Miao J, Feng Q, Li Y, Zhao Q, Zhou C, Lu H, Fan D, Yan J, Lu Y, Tian Q (2021) Chromosome-­ scale assembly and analysis of biomass crop miscanthus lutarioriparius genome. Nat Commun 12:2458 Misra N, Panda P, Parida B, Mishra B (2016) Way forward to achieve sustainable and cost-­effective biofuel production from microalgae: a review. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:2735–2756 Misra BB, Langefeld C, Olivier M, Cox LA (2019) Integrated omics: tools, advances and future approaches. J Mol Endocrinol 62:R21–R45 Mouratiadou I, Stella T, Gaiser T, Wicke B, Nendel C, Ewert F, van der Hilst F (2020) Sustainable intensification of crop residue exploitation for bioenergy: opportunities and challenges. GCB Bioenergy 12:71–89 Poudel S, Giannone RJ, Rodriguez M, Raman B, Martin MZ, Engle NL, Mielenz JR, Nookaew I, Brown SD, Tschaplinski TJ (2017) Integrated omics analyses reveal the details of metabolic adaptation of clostridium thermocellum to lignocellulose-derived growth inhibitors released during the deconstruction of switchgrass. Biotechnol Biofuels 10:1–14 Ramos-Madrigal J, Smith BD, Moreno-Mayar JV, Gopalakrishnan S, Ross-Ibarra J, Gilbert MTP, Wales N (2016) Genome sequence of a 5,310-year-old maize cob provides insights into the early stages of maize domestication. Curr Biol 26:3195–3201 Reid WV, Ali MK, Field CB (2020) The future of bioenergy. Glob Chang Biol 26:274–286 Riaño-Pachón DM, Mattiello L (2017) Draft genome sequencing of the sugarcane hybrid SP80-3280. F1000Research 6 Sablok G, Fu Y, Bobbio V, Laura M, Rotino GL, Bagnaresi P, Allavena A, Velikova V, Viola R, Loreto F, Li M, Varotto C (2014) Fuelling genetic and metabolic exploration of C3 bioen-

84

A. Mahmood et al.

ergy crops through the first reference transcriptome of Arundo donax L.  Plant Biotechnol J 12:554–567 Sharma MK, Sharma R, Cao P, Jenkins J, Bartley LE, Qualls M, Grimwood J, Schmutz J, Rokhsar D, Ronald PC (2012) A genome-wide survey of switchgrass genome structure and organization. PLoS One 7:e33892 Sheng J, Yan M, Wang J, Zhao L, Zhou F, Hu Z, Jin S, Diao Y (2021) The complete chloroplast genome sequences of five miscanthus species, and comparative analyses with other grass plastomes. Ind Crop Prod 162:113248 Slade R, Bauen A, Gross R (2014) Global bioenergy resources. Nat Clim Change 4:99–105 Stamenković OS, Siliveru K, Veljković VB, Banković-Ilić IB, Tasić MB, Ciampitti IA, Đalović IG, Mitrović PM, Sikora VŠ, Prasad PV (2020) Production of biofuels from sorghum. Renew Sust Energ Rev 124:109769 Thirugnanasambandam PP, Hoang NV, Henry RJ (2018) The challenge of analyzing the sugarcane genome. Front Plant Sci 9:616 Tiedge K, Li X, Merrill AT, Davisson D, Chen Y, Yu P, Tantillo DJ, Last RL, Zerbe P (2022) Comparative transcriptomics and metabolomics reveal specialized metabolite drought stress responses in switchgrass (Panicum virgatum). New Phytol 236:1393–1408 Tuskan GA, Difazio S, Jansson S, Bohlmann J, Grigoriev I, Hellsten U, Putnam N, Ralph S, Rombauts S, Salamov A, Schein J, Sterck L, Aerts A, Bhalerao RR, Bhalerao RP, Blaudez D, Boerjan W, Brun A, Brunner A, Busov V, Campbell M, Carlson J, Chalot M, Chapman J, Chen GL, Cooper D, Coutinho PM, Couturier J, Covert S, Cronk Q, Cunningham R, Davis J, Degroeve S, Déjardin A, Depamphilis C, Detter J, Dirks B, Dubchak I, Duplessis S, Ehlting J, Ellis B, Gendler K, Goodstein D, Gribskov M, Grimwood J, Groover A, Gunter L, Hamberger B, Heinze B, Helariutta Y, Henrissat B, Holligan D, Holt R, Huang W, Islam-Faridi N, Jones S, Jones-Rhoades M, Jorgensen R, Joshi C, Kangasjärvi J, Karlsson J, Kelleher C, Kirkpatrick R, Kirst M, Kohler A, Kalluri U, Larimer F, Leebens-Mack J, Leplé JC, Locascio P, Lou Y, Lucas S, Martin F, Montanini B, Napoli C, Nelson DR, Nelson C, Nieminen K, Nilsson O, Pereda V, Peter G, Philippe R, Pilate G, Poliakov A, Razumovskaya J, Richardson P, Rinaldi C, Ritland K, Rouzé P, Ryaboy D, Schmutz J, Schrader J, Segerman B, Shin H, Siddiqui A, Sterky F, Terry A, Tsai CJ, Uberbacher E, Unneberg P et al (2006) The genome of black cottonwood, Populus trichocarpa (torr. & gray). Science 313:1596–1604 Valentine J, Clifton-Brown J, Hastings A, Robson P, Allison G, Smith P (2012) Food vs. fuel: the use of land for lignocellulosic ‘next generation’energy crops that minimize competition with primary food production. GCB Bioenergy 4:1–19 Vilanova C, Porcar M (2016) Are multi-omics enough? Nat Microbiol 1:1–2 Yuan JS, Tiller KH, Al-Ahmad H, Stewart NR, Stewart CN (2008) Plants to power: bioenergy to fuel the future. Trends Plant Sci 13:421–429

5

Genomics of Bioenergy Crops Bhupendra Prasad and Yajushi Mishra

Abstract

As the world population is increasing day by day, thus, the need to produce large amount of energy is also increasing. Therefore, the hunt for a renewable and cheap source of energy has become a huge challenge in modern times. Plants are always been used as a cost-effective and renewable source of energy; thus, for the continuation of this, it has become crucial to constantly improve their biomass growth and quality through genome sequencing. Research on a plant genomics will help us to produce bioenergy crops. The understanding of microbial conversion is also important as it can design new strains or enzymes that will be capable of producing biofuels and bioproducts through plant biomass. The liquid fuels and chemical products that we use today are obtained from fossil resources. Thus, the production of fuels and bioproducts from plant biomass will help us to become less dependent on fossils.

5.1 Introduction Genomics is a branch of molecular biology which mainly focuses on the structure, function, evolution, and genetic mapping of genomes. Predominantly, it is the study of complete set of genetic material. Therefore, genomes contain the information related to that organism, and it may help to know the interaction among genes and with the environment and how a specific genome sequence is responsible for changes in the environment. Likewise, genomics is playing a vital role in plants, as it inspects and helps to understand their functions in different areas. Till date, plants

B. Prasad (*) · Y. Mishra Department of Microbiology, Career College, Bhopal, India © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_5

85

86

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

have always been used for human food and been burned for heating or other selfish reasons, but now more widely, they have been considered as a bioenergy crops. Bioenergy crops are those crops that may be used to produce bioenergy or biofuel to a large extent of biomass and have high energy potential. These are mainly low-cost and low- maintenance crops used to produce energy through combustion. Sugarcane, Sorghum, maize, etc. are among those crops that have been used for producing bioenergy. Earlier, before the discovery of large reserves of coals, natural gas, and oils, the plant biomass was primarily used as energy for heating and cooking. Energy from biomass can be produced in several ways. The oldest way was to burn biomass to produce heat. Nowadays, biomass can be burned with coal to produce steam, which successively runs turbine to produce electricity. Other such ways to produce energy from plant biomass are pyrolysis and gasification. Pyrolysis is the process in which plant biomass is heated between temperatures 400 and 700 °C in the absence of oxygen, and the oil thus formed is converted into fuel (Fig.  5.1). Gasification is the process that is done at temperature up to 800–900 °C under hypoxic condition which principally generates carbon monoxide, methane, and hydrogen; therefore, by using chemical catalyst, this can be also used to produce fuels (Vermerris 2010). Prior to all, the major task is the understanding of plant genomics, microbial conversion, and their sustainability. Plant genomics involves the understanding of plant metabolism, their physiology, and their growth so that new bioenergy crops can be developed with the changes in their gene level for the production of bioenergy (Fig. 5.2) (Soares et al. 2017). Microbial conversion involves understanding at microscopic or microbial level through which new plant traits and their communities can be developed and certain enzymes which are necessary to produce bioproducts can be synthesized (Fig. 5.3). Last but not the least, for the development of new methods that are necessary to produce bioenergy crops on degraded land, it is essential to gain knowledge on genomic level of plants and microbes and their interactions. Primitively, when it

Fig. 5.1  Schematic representation of pyrolysis

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops

87

Fig. 5.2  Genomics of plant

Fig. 5.3  Microbial conversion

was recognized that plants can be used to generate biofuels and energy, the instant focus was shifted toward the crops such as sugarcane, maize, Sorghum, etc. to produce bioenergy (Fig. 5.4). Therefore, genomics can be used as a key tool for modifying plants for energy use.

88

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

Fig. 5.4 Sustainability

5.2 Applications of Genomics in the Development of Energy Crops Genomics is basically used in the modification of the plant genomes. Genomics helps the energy crops to become better to provide the energy. We can even say that with the help of genomics we can make the crop more effective. The more the crop is effective, the more the energy is generated as compared to the crops which cannot be genetically modified. Genomics can also be used to identify the genes which are desirable to produce bioenergy crops. The crop that has been selected for modification is based on certain conditions such as their high nutritional value, growth value, and environmental growth. Genomics is also used for the selection of high-level genotypes. Genomics also helps in extracting genotypes from the parent crop, i.e., the crop which is selected for generating bioenergy. Furthermore, the genes extracted from those parent crops are added to other energy-yielding crops to show different functions. The advancements in genomics bring the potential stability in crops which gives the best result in terms of their speed of growth and to produce more and best-quality crop. As time passes, the advancement in genomics brings a great opportunity for the scientist to develop a seed which has a high production rate, weather tolerance, and efficiency to grow with the usage of less pesticide (Fig. 5.5). The emergence of the genomics results in the development of a new variety of crop that provides a makeable sustainability and livestock production. The combination of such traditional and latest variety of trait leads to increase in the genomic resources. These resources help in the increasing productivity of bioenergy sources. As the genomics become advance and new things are discovered, it will help in identifying the segments of the genome which are responsible for the changes and adaptation. It also improves the understanding of evolution in the crop better than the natural selection, mutation, and recombination process. Knowing genomics also helps to understand the

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops INPUT light CO2

89 OUTPUT

PRODUCTS

grain

food feed

biomass

fodder heat

sugars

biofuels bioproducts

water nutrients fertilizer

Fig. 5.5  Method through which bioenergy crops are used to produce biofuels/bioproducts

structure and dynamics of genome and find how the genome of the crop adapts to the artificial and natural selection and respond to the factors which are affecting them earlier. Thus, in all these manners, genomics plays a crucial role in the development of bioenergy crops (Kausch et al. 2010).

5.3 Evolutionary Relationships in Higher Plants and Their Genomes The genome of plants basically holds the key to understand evolutionary history. The plant genomics generally has spectacular diversity in size, complexity, composition, etc. which carry evolutionary history, whole genome duplication, etc. The evolutionary approaches are applied on some suitable species or traits for bioenergy production. To understand the evolutionary approach, cell wall composition is the main factor. Phylogenetic and genomic studies can help to reveal the processes by which the new species arise, and phylogenies can also help to guide our efforts to improve desired composition. Viridiplantae is a green plant that consist of half a million species, and it existed approximately billion years ago in evolutionary history. It consists of single-celled Chlamydomonas to largest tree sequoia. Similar to sizes, the nuclear genomic structure also varies from plants to plants. The chlorophyte Ostreococcustauri, is a photosynthetic eukaryote which has a smallest genome of −12 megabase pairs. In angiosperms, only the base pairs vary from −60 Mb in Genlisea to 149 Gb in Paris japonica (Soltis and Soltis 2020). There are several evolutionary processes due to which there is a huge diversity in sizes and genomes as well, such as repeated genomic sequences in conifers, repeated cycles of polyploidy in angiosperms, or through mitotic division in genomic size in bladderwort Utricularia gibba.

90

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

There are many other processes that have marked their signatures in the evolutionary relationship of plants, and those processes include hybridization, introgression, mutation, and WGD (whole genome duplication plays a major role in plant phylogeny) (Soltis and Soltis 2020). WGD made several genetic as well as structural changes which resulted out in positive way, as plants can bear climatic changes, adaptations, and stresses. These all are not a complete information on evolutionary history of plants because there are many more about plant phylogeny and their genomes, and we will get to know only when more genomes will be sequenced.

5.4 Genome Sequencing Genome sequencing is a method to identify the genetic makeup of a specific cell type. This method helps to identify or also helps to bring the changes in the area of genomes. Genomic sequence can provide information on genetic variation that can lead to disease or increase the risk of disease. Genome sequencing represents valuable shortcut that helps the scientist to understand which type of genome is working and gives a best result. It also provides an understanding for traits. Basically, the genome sequencing carries the clues related to genes, through which scientists are able to understand the trait. It also provides the perfect base view of the target genome which makes it easier to understand the trait. It also helps in identifying the potential conducive traits and then follows up for further studies of gene expression to overcome from such situations. Genome sequence delivers a large amount of data in a short time to support the novel genome assembly. Sequencing provides many information making plant analysis more feasible on a large scale. Genome sequencing involves several methods such as Sanger’s method, next-generation method, chemical degradation, etc., sees how the genes are arranged, and also identifies the sequences of genes. Genome sequencing creates a chance for the production and in the modification of genome in the plant to make it more productive according to the conditions. This also brings a genetic improvement which is beneficial.

5.5 Analysis of Genetic Variation Genetic variation plays an important role in evolution. Genetic variation involved in the change in the sequences of alleles leads to the difference in the identity. Genetic variation allows the organism to overcome the environmental conditions which are both beneficial and harmful. Genetic variation can either be present in natural population or it can be artificially created by mutagenesis. Analysis is important as it helps to find out the harmful trait or symptoms so that it can be diagnosed early. Genetic variation analysis helps in arranging the trait in the systematic way so that taxonomy becomes easier. To find the new trait, the genetic variation plays a crucial role. Genetic variation provides a flexibility and survival for the population in any kind of environmental circumstances.

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops

91

Analysis of genetic variation of plant is considered as the analysis of all single feature polymorphism. Now, due to the advancements in the genetic technology, the study of complex plant genome is facilitated by genome sequencing and other methods. Efficient targeted techniques have been developed for the discovery of the naturally occurring or induced changes. Identification of the genetic basis of gelatinization temperature in plant starches a good example because this trait is important for determining the energy to gelatinize the starch to convert in product and biofuel. With the emergence of next-generation sequencing technologies, genetic variation can now be determined on a large scale and resolved by re-sequencing thousands of strains systematically (Kausch et al. 2010).

5.5.1 Target Traits for Bioenergy Plant Improvement In recent times, it is a major challenge for scientists to recognize crops and their traits that must undergo improvement for the production of bioenergy (Fig. 5.6). The following improvement must be done on those crops and their traits that have been selected for bioenergy production (Kole et al. 2012): • The crops have to be improved in such a manner, so that it can be made to grow on degraded lands and under any environmental conditions.

Fig. 5.6  Conversion flowchart for the flow of biomass to bioenergy

92

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

• The crop must be improved so that it can be helpful in the production of biomass in a large scale. • The improvement in the trait can also increase the energy potential. • The trait must include an increase in efficiency of nitrogen which will be helpful in agronomic value by increasing crop production. • The crop must have low potency to grow as a weed. • The crop that is improved has high amount of biofuel production as compared to the non-improved crops.

5.6 Model Bioenery Crops Globally, bioenergy crops can be grown in both conventional and nonconventional areas. Thorough study is required for understanding how these crops are essential for the simulation of biomass productivity (Fig. 5.7). The model of bioenergy crops reduces the cost of field experiments. Simulation of biomass is based on three situations: (1) potential growth, (2) water-limited growth, and (3) actual growth. Potential growth means that the crops are grown in such a situation where water and nutrient supply is enough and the crops are free from weeds, diseases, and pests. Water-limited growth, the name itself, reveals that the crops are grown in limited water availability and under restricted temperature. In actual growth, the crops are grown in all limitations such as water and nutrient limitations, and the crops are not free from weeds, diseases, and pests.Till now, there are 23 versatile models that have been selected for the simulation of biomass production of energy crops. Several C4 grasses such as switchgrass, Miscanthus, and Sorghum are useful in the production of biofuels at a very high scale (Rui et al. 2017). Thus, the biofuels obtained from these species are helpful in reducing the atmospheric CO2 level that has been produced by burning fossil fuels. Being a perennial crop, these crops can be grown

Fig. 5.7  Types of bioenergy crops

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops

93

on land with low input requirements. These crops can garner large amount of biomass; therefore, these are of high potential energy crops.

5.7 Genomics of Specific Bioenergy Species As the resource of energy becomes limited, all humans need to find the alternative sources of energy so that the dependency on the fossil resource can be reduced. Now, the bioenergy crops have been developed with the help of genomics which act as a alternative source of energy. Due to such features and tendency, the bioenergy crops receive the great attention. This is only possible because of the availability of genetic tools and the potential to accelerate the improvement program in the crop so that it gives the best result. Here are some crops that have a great scope of research. Maize, Sorghum, sugarcane, poplar, eucalyptus, etc. are the bioenergy crops which have a great biomass production (Vermerris 2010). Different techniques such as genetic mapping and reverse genetics can be used to unravel the essential trait and improvement in bioenergy trait that is required to increase the potential. But, while doing this, the major product remains the same; the bioenergy resources or trait needs to be focused on enhancing without affecting the quality yield.

5.8  Sorghum Sorghum, grass related to sugarcane, and maize are grown for food, feed, fiber, and fuel. It is the most efficient biomass accumulators, providing food and fuel from starch and sugar. It is the source of ethanol in many areas. Sorghum has the potential to use as cellulosic biofuel crops. The tendency to produce cellulosic biofuel is more than that of sugarcane and other crops. Water requirement for Sorghum is less; therefore, it can be grown easily. This can lead to the desired change in the structure. The seeds of Sorghum genus provide the opportunity to gain new insights in the biology of weed and invasive (Fig.  5.8). The small genome of Sorghum has a detailed structure which helps in the understanding of the structure and function of the related grass like sugarcane and maize. Sorghum is representative of tropical grass in that it has C4 photosynthesis. Sorghum is a highly promising bioenergy crop because of its low maintenance, high tolerance, low input, and wide adaptability, and thus it is sufficient to use it as a bioenergy crop. The biomass of Sorghum can be maximized by modifying cell wall composition; this may help in elucidating the genetic makeup.

5.9 Sugarcane Sugarcane is one of the most known types of crop. These are generally a large green grass which have sucrose in their stem. It generally propagates vegetatively by planting the stem section, and the buds present in the stem emerge out as a plant.

94

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

Fig. 5.8  Sorghum, the most efficient biomass accumulator

Fig. 5.9  Representation of sugarcane as a bioenergy crop

The whole process takes 8–24 months after planting. Sugarcane is a bioenergy crop because of the sugar-based fuel ethanol. Ethanol is used as an alternative of fuel source because of its quality of complete combustion with zero emission. Sugarcane is the most efficient biomass producer known. The biomass produced is either in the form of bagasse or as a dedicated biomass crop (Vermerris 2010). Sugarcane has one of the most complex genomes in crop plants due to the extreme level of polyploidy. Sugarcane shows interspecific hybridization with complex genomic trait with varying number of chromosomes (Fig.  5.9). The genetic map of sugarcane based on molecular marker has been developed due to which it offers a great opportunity for genetic enhancement to develop new transgenic

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops

95

variety of sugarcane, which is not possible by mutagenesis because of its polyploidy (Vermerris 2010). The bioenergy traits that are present in sugarcane are sugar yield and cell wall composition that renders biomass more efficiently. Sugarcane creates great challenges to the genome sequencing contributing to the fact that sugar genomics has lagged in comparison with other grass species such as rice, maize, and Sorghum. Sugarcane is the main source of sugar and has created a benchmark to become the feedstock for the efficient biofuel production. Sugarcane improvement has already focused on the sucrose yield traits. Internationally, it is the leading crop with significant amount being used for ethanol production and electricity generation.

5.10 Maize Maize is the important crop for food, forage, and fuel across the temperate area of the world. It has grown with the high range of photosynthetic activity leading to high rain and biomass yield potential. The development of maize as an energy crop will be greatly advanced by the application of genomes. The maize genome is complex with interspecific variation in gene order and allelic content exceeding the levels between the primate species (Fig. 5.10). The complexity of the genome can be determined by the polyploidization, and several new sequencing methods help in the comprehensive view on structural variation in the maize. There are several genome approaches that have been used to increase the quality and the nutritive value of maize. Even the residues left behind are used as a food for animals because of the protein present in the maize. The big percentage of maize is used as fuel ethanol. In maize, the ethanol is produced by the fermentation of glucose which is released during the hydrolysis of its starch. The production of ethanol and maize is always a competition between a food and a fuel. This is because of high requirement of water and fertilizers which are leading to the very less environmental benefits as compared to fossil fuel. Maize always remains a

Fig. 5.10  Development of maize as a bioenergy crop

96

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

dominant crop almost in every part where it is grown. It is dominant for food as well as for its biomass yield.

5.11 Poplar Poplar is a fast-growing woody angiosperm tree (Fig. 5.11). They provide a wide range of services in the society; also, they have wide range of growing habitat. Poplar generally grows in the temperate and cooler areas (Fig. 5.12). Poplar is used in all types of industries like its pulp and chips that are used in forest industry (Yang et al. 2009). It provides help in bioremediation, nutrient cycling, and biofiltration and works as biofuel energy crops. Poplar is a complex amalgam of modern and ancient species that help to become a model for evolutionary studies.

Fig. 5.11  An overview of poplar plant

5  Genomics of Bioenergy Crops

97

Production of material inputs and machines:

Poplar cuttings for planting trees

Herbicides

Fertilizers (N, P and K)

Harvesting and field termination:

Poplar field

Field management operations: Herbicide application Plowing Harrowing Planting Mechanical weeding Fertilizer application Disc harrowing

Forestry and agricultural machines

Harvesting Forwarding (stems and tops) Chipping (stems and tops) Stump lifting Stump forwarding

Transportation: Wood chips from plantation to bioenergyconversion site Machines to plantation Stumps to disposal site

Fig. 5.12  Representation of how poplar field is harvested Fig. 5.13  An overview of eucalyptus plant

5.12 Eucalyptus It is a widely planted hardwood plant. It is basically a native of Australia. The member of this species has more than 700 species, and they have wide range of adaptable environment conditions (Fig. 5.13). Ecalyptus has high biomass accumulation rates and marginal growing conditions. The adaptability of eucalyptus coupled with their fast growth and superior woody properties has driven their rapid adoption for plantation forestry in many countries. It provides a key tool as a renewable resource for the production of pulp, paper, biomaterials, and bioenergy. Eucalyptus has large diversity and high concentration of essential oils.

98

B. Prasad and Y. Mishra

References Kausch A, Hague J, Oliver MJ, Li Y, Daniell H, Mascia P, Neal Stewart C Jr (2010) Genetic modification in dedicated bioenergy crops and strategies for gene confinement, pp 299–310 Kole C, Joshi CP, Shonnard DR (2012) Handbook of bioenergy crop plants, pp 21–27 Rui J, Tong-Tong W, Jin S, Sheng G, Wei Z, Ya-Jun Y, Shao-Lin C, Ryusuke H (2017) Modeling the biomass of energy crops: descriptions, strengths and prospective, pp 1197–1210 Soares SD, Sobreiro M, Araujo VC, Novaes E (2017) Plant-based genetic tools for biofuels production, pp 124–143 Soltis PS, Soltis DE (2020) Plant genomes: markers of evolutionary history and drivers of evolutionary changes Vermerris W (2010) Survey of genomics approaches to improve bioenergy traits in maize, sorghum and sugarcane. J Integr Plant Biol 53:105–119 Yang X, Kalluri UC, DiFazio SP, Wullschleger SD, Tschaplinski TJ, Cheng Z-M, Tuskan GA (2009) Poplar genomics: state of the science, pp 285–308

6

Omics Approaches for Sorghum: Paving the Way to a Resilient and Sustainable Bioenergy Future Muhammad Tanveer Altaf, Waqas Liaqat, Faheem Shehzad Baloch, Muhammad Azhar Nadeem, Mehmet Bedir, Amjad Ali, and Gönül Cömertpay

Abstract

Sorghum is a promising bioenergy crop, but its productivity is affected by abiotic stressors such as drought, heat, and salinity. To address this issue, a concerted effort is being made to understand the stress tolerance mechanisms and gene discovery in Sorghum, along with the interaction of genetic and environmental factors. In this regard, several omics approaches, tools, and resources have already been developed for Sorghum cultivation. The advent of modern sequencing technologies has significantly accelerated genomics and transcriptomic studies in Sorghum. This has facilitated the use of quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping, genome-wide association studies (GWAS), and genomic selection (GS) to identify key genes and genetic markers that contribute to abiotic stress tolerance in Sorghum. However, there has been limited effort in other omics branches such as proteomics, metabolomics, and ionomics. Despite the extensive cataloging of omics resources for Sorghum, there is still a need for greater integration of omics approaches to efficiently utilize these resources and gain a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in abiotic stress tolerance. This would enable researchers to understand the plant’s responses and the genetic regulatory networks involved in abiotic stress tolerance, which would be helpful in enhancing Sorghum productivity and contributing to sustainable bioenergy production. M. T. Altaf (*) · F. S. Baloch · M. A. Nadeem · M. Bedir · A. Ali Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Sivas University of Science and Technology, Sivas, Türkiye W. Liaqat Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Field Crops, Çukurova University, Adana, Türkiye G. Cömertpay Eastern Mediterranean Agricultural Research Institute, Adana, Türkiye © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 M. Aasim et al. (eds.), Biotechnology and Omics Approaches for Bioenergy Crops, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4954-0_6

99

100

M. T. Altaf et al.

Keywords

Sorghum bicolor · Abiotic stress · GWAS · Genomic selection · Bioenergy

6.1 Introduction Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.  Moench) is a stress-resistant crop with extremely efficient nitrogen and water usage and highly productive NADP-ME type C4 photosynthesis (Wang et al. 2009). It is the fifth most significant cereal crop in the world, providing a staple diet for nearly 500 million people in arid and semiarid countries. It is an essential part of the poultry business (Boyles et al. 2019), animal feed, and fodder. It responds exceptionally well to biotechnologies ranging from simple in vitro culture to transgenic, cisgenic, and genome-editing approaches. Outcrossing of Sorghum with weedy relatives has hindered the regulation of GM technology in this crop. All aboveground components of Sorghum, starch, sugar, and stem biomass are employed in the production of first- and second-generation biofuels (Cotton et al. 2013). Despite the widespread usage of sweet sorghum as a biofuel source, biomass Sorghum has recently been acknowledged as an attractive feedstock for cellulosic ethanol production. This kind of Sorghum typically has stems taller than 5 meters, more leaves, fibrous roots, and better vegetative growth potential and is appropriate for mechanization (Venuto and Kindiger 2008). In addition to producing ethanol of the second generation, biomass Sorghum releases energy during biomass burning (da Silva et al. 2018). In addition to being a suitable substitute for corn and sugarcane, it also requires less water. It is an annual grass with a higher dry matter yield than perennials but with a shorter duration, making crop rotation less expensive. Due to its high biomass output, low input requirements, and ability to thrive on marginal soils with limited water, Sorghum is an attractive bioenergy crop. Yet, abiotic factors such as drought, salinity, and high temperature can have a significant impact on Sorghum development and yield (Fig. 6.1). Omics technologies have significantly assisted in the study of plant responses to abiotic stressors (Zhang et al. 2016). Omics tools have played a key role in crop quality enhancement and protection, leading to a rise in agricultural food production by improving the quality, taste, and nutrient profile of food crops. Through the application of genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, the accuracy and predictability of plant breeding have been enhanced, lowering the time and cost required to produce more nutritious, stress-resistant food crops of superior quality (Van Emon, 2016). For instance, omics technologies have been able to generate information on prospective plant-­ microbe and plant-pest interactions in order to transfer genes that can affect crop responsiveness to climatic conditions; these technologies are utilized in genetic engineering for biotechnological purposes (Coleman-Derr and Tringe 2014). Linking genes to traits increases scientific certainty, resulting in improved cultivars and a better understanding of insect and weed resistance mechanisms (Van Emon, 2016). Omics allows for a systems biology approach to understanding the dynamic

6  Omics Approaches for Sorghum: Paving the Way to a Resilient…

101

Fig. 6.1  Abiotic stresses and their effects on plants

Fig. 6.2  Various omics approaches for studying abiotic stress responses in plants

interaction among genes, proteins, and metabolites within the phenotype (Fig. 6.2). This integrated approach mainly relies on chemical analytical methods, bioinformatics, computer analysis, and numerous other biological disciplines to protect and improve crops (Van Emon, 2016; Shinozaki and Sakakibara 2009). In the post-genomic age, proteomics and metabolomics are two evolving “-omic” techniques (Fernandez-Garcia et al. 2011). Proteomics has enabled the identification and characterization of numerous proteins in cereal and leguminous crops that are responsible for stress responses and their regulation (Silva-Sanchez et al. 2015). Metabolomics concentrates on the global profile of metabolites with low molecular

102

M. T. Altaf et al.

weight (