Laboratory Yields and Process Stream Compositions from E‐Mill and Dry‐Grind Corn Processes Using a Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Enzyme

In dry‐grind corn processing, the whole kernel is fermented to produce ethanol and distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS); the E‐Mill process was developed to generate coproducts in addition to DDGS. Compositions of thin stillage and wet grains obtained from the E‐Mill process will be different from the dry‐grind process. Knowledge of thin stillage compositions will provide information to improve coproducts from both processes. Laboratory dry‐grind and E‐Mill processes that used granular starch hydrolyzing enzymes (GSHE) were compared and process yields determined. Two methods, centrifugation and screening, were used to produce thin stillage and wet grains from the laboratory processes. Compositions of process streams were determined. In the dry‐grind process using GSHE, solids contents of beer, whole stillage, and wet grains were higher compared to the same fractions from the E‐Mill process using GSHE. Solids contents of mash for both processes were similar. Total solids, soluble solids, and ash contents of thin stillage were similar for the two processes. Fat content of thin stillage from E‐Mill was lower than that from the dry‐grind process; protein content of E‐Mill thin stillage was higher than that from dry‐grind thin stillage. Removal of germ and fiber before fermentation changed composition of thin stillage from the E‐Mill process. The screening method produced higher thin stillage and lower wet grains yields than using a centrifugation method. The screening method was less time consuming but resulted in limited wet grains material for additional analyses or processing. The centrifugation method of thin stillage separation removed more solids from thin stillage than the screening method.     

Comparison of Enzymatic (E‐Mill) and Conventional Dry‐Grind Corn Processes Using a Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Enzyme

A new low temperature liquefaction and saccharification enzyme STARGEN 001 (Genencor International, Palo Alto, CA) with high granular starch hydrolyzing activity was used in enzymatic dry‐grind corn process to improve recovery of germ and pericarp fiber before fermentation. Enzymatic dry‐grind corn process was compared with conventional dry‐grind corn process using STARGEN 001 with same process parameters of dry solid content, pH, temperature, enzyme and yeast usage, and time. Sugar, ethanol, glycerol and organic acid profiles, fermentation rate, ethanol and coproducts yields were investigated. Final ethanol concentration of enzymatic dry‐grind corn process was 15.5 ± 0.2% (v/v), which was 9.2% higher than conventional process. Fermentation rate was also higher for enzymatic dry‐grind corn process. Ethanol yields of enzymatic and conventional dry‐grind corn processes were 0.395 ± 0.006 and 0.417 ± 0.002 L/kg (2.65 ± 0.04 and 2.80 ± 0.01 gal/bu), respectively. Three additional coproducts, germ 8.0 ± 0.4% (db), pericarp fiber 7.7 ± 0.4% (db), and endosperm fiber 5.2 ± 0.6% (db) were produced in addition to DDGS with enzymatic dry‐grind corn process. DDGS generated from enzymatic dry‐grind corn process was 66% less than conventional process.     

Ethanol Production from Modified and Conventional Dry‐Grind Processes Using Different Corn Types

Different corn types were used to compare ethanol production from the conventional dry‐grind process to wet or dry fractionation processes. High oil, dent corn with high starch extractability, dent corn with low starch extractability and waxy corn were selected. In the conventional process, corn was ground using a hammer mill; water was added to produce slurry which was fermented. In the wet fractionation process, corn was soaked in water; germ and pericarp fiber were removed before fermentation. In the dry fractionation process, corn was tempered, degerminated, and passed through a roller mill. Germ and pericarp fiber were separated from the endosperm. Due to removal of germ and pericarp fiber in the fractionation methods, more corn was used in the wet (10%) and dry (15%) fractionation processes than in the conventional process. Water was added to endosperm and the resulting slurry was fermented. Oil, protein, and residual starch in germ were analyzed. Pericarp fiber was analyzed for residual starch and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) content. Analysis of variance and Fisher's least significant difference test were used to compare means of final ethanol concentrations as well as germ and pericarp fiber yields. The wet fractionation process had the highest final ethanol concentrations (15.7% v/v) compared with dry fractionation (15.0% v/v) and conventional process (14.1% v/v). Higher ethanol concentrations were observed in fractionation processes compared to the conventional process due to higher fermentable substrate per batch available as a result of germ and pericarp fiber removal. Germ and pericarp yields were 7.47 and 6.03% for the wet fractionation process and 7.19 and 6.22% for the dry fractionation process, respectively. Germ obtained from the wet fractionation process had higher oil content (34% db) compared with the dry fractionation method (11% db). Residual starch content in the germ fraction was 16% for wet fractionation and 44% for dry fractionation. Residual starch in the pericarp fiber fraction was lower for the wet fractionation process (19.9%) compared with dry fractionation (23.7%).     

Protease Treatment to Improve Ethanol Fermentation in Modified Dry Grind Corn Processes

To improve fractionation efficiency in modified dry grind corn processes, we evaluated the effectiveness of protease treatment in reducing residual starch in endosperm fiber. Three schemes of protease treatment were conducted in three processes: 1) enzymatic milling or E‐Mill, 2) dry fractionation with raw starch fermentation or dry RS, and 3) dry fractionation with conventional fermentation or dry conv. Kinetics of free amino nitrogen production were similar in both dry and wet fractionation (E‐Mill), indicating that proteolysis was effective in all three schemes. At the end of fermentation, endosperm fiber was recovered and its residual starch measured. Using protease treatment, residual starch in the endosperm fiber was reduced by 1.9% w/w (22% relative reduction) in dry conv and 1.7% w/w (8% relative reduction) in dry RS, while no reduction was observed in the E‐Mill process. Protease treatment increased ethanol production rates early in fermentation (≤24 hr) but final ethanol concentrations were unaffected in both dry RS and E‐Mill. In dry conv, the addition of protease resulted in a decline in final ethanol concentration by 0.3% v/v, as well as a higher variability in liquefaction product concentration (higher standard deviations in the glucose and maltose yields). Protease treatment can be used effectively to enhance modified dry grind processes.     

Effects of Protease and Urea on a Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Process for Corn Ethanol Production

The dry grind process using granular starch hydrolyzing enzymes (GSHE) saves energy. The amount of GSHE used is an important factor affecting dry grind process economics. Proteases can weaken protein matrix to aid starch release and may reduce GSHE doses. Two specific proteases, an exoprotease and an endoprotease, were evaluated in the dry grind process using GSHE (GSH process). The effect of protease and urea addition on GSH process was also evaluated. Addition of these proteases resulted in higher ethanol concentrations (mean increase of 0.3–1.8 v/v) and lower distillers' dried grains with solubles (DDGS) yields (mean decrease of 1.3–8.0% db) compared with the control (no protease addition). As protease levels and GSHE increased, ethanol concentrations increased and DDGS yields decreased. Protease addition reduced the required GSHE dose. Final mean ethanol concentrations without urea (15.2% v/v) were higher than with urea (15.0% v/v) in GSH process across all protease treatments.     

Comparison of Modified Dry‐Grind Corn Processes for Fermentation Characteristics and DDGS Composition

Three different modified dry‐grind corn processes, quick germ (QG), quick germ and quick fiber (QGQF), and enzymatic milling (E‐Mill) were compared with the conventional dry‐grind corn process for fermentation characteristics and distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) composition. Significant effects were observed on fermentation characteristics and DDGS composition with these modified dry‐grind processes. The QG, QGQF, and E‐Mill processes increased ethanol concentration by 8–27% relative to the conventional dry‐grind process. These process modifications reduced the fiber content of DDGS from 11 to 2% and increased the protein content of DDGS from 28 to 58%.     

Hydrolysis and Fermentation of Pericarp and Endosperm Fibers Recovered from Enzymatic Corn Dry‐Grind Process

A modified dry‐grind corn process has been developed that allows recovery of both pericarp and endosperm fibers as coproducts at the front end of the process before fermentation. The modified process is called enzymatic milling (E‐Mill) dry‐grind process. In a conventional dry‐grind corn process, only the starch component of the corn kernel is converted into ethanol. Additional ethanol can be produced from corn if the fiber component can also be converted into ethanol. In this study, pericarp and endosperm fibers recovered in the E‐Mill dry‐grind process were evaluated as a potential ethanol feedstock. Both fractions were tested for fermentability and potential ethanol yield. Total ethanol yield recovered from corn by fermenting starch, pericarp, and endosperm fibers was also determined. Results show that endosperm fiber produced 20.5% more ethanol than pericarp fiber on a g/100 g of fiber basis. Total ethanol yield obtained by fermenting starch and both fiber fractions was 0.370 L/kg compared with ethanol yield of 0.334 L/kg obtained by fermenting starch alone.     

Effect of Decorticating Sorghum on Ethanol Production and Composition of DDGS

The use of a renewable biomass that contains considerable amounts of starch and cellulose could provide a sugar platform for the production of numerous bioproducts. Pretreatment technologies have been developed to increase the bioconversion rate for both starch and cellulosic‐based biomass. This study investigated the effect of decortication as a pretreatment method on ethanol production from sorghum, as well as investigating its impact on quality of distillers' dry grains with solubles (DDGS). Eight sorghum hybrids with 0, 10, and 20% of their outer layers removed were used as raw materials for ethanol production. The decorticated samples were fermented to ethanol using Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Removal of germ and fiber before fermentation allowed for greater starch loading for ethanol fermentation and resulted in increased ethanol production. Ethanol yields increased as the percentage of decortication increased. The decortication process resulted in DDGS with higher protein content and lower fiber content, which may improve the feed quality.     

Pericarp Fiber Separation from Corn Flour Using Sieving and Air Classification

In the dry‐grind process, starch in ground corn (flour) is converted to ethanol, and the remaining corn components (protein, fat, fiber, and ash) form a coproduct called distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). Fiber separation from corn flour would produce fiber as an additional coproduct that could be used as combustion fuel, cattle feed, and as feedstock for producing valuable products such as “cellulosic” ethanol, corn fiber gum, oligosaccharides, phytosterols, and polyols. Fiber is not fermented in the dry‐grind corn process. Its separation before fermentation would increase ethanol productivity in the fermenter. Recently, we showed that the elusieve process, a combination of sieving and elutriation (air flow), was effective in fiber separation from DDGS. In this study, we evaluated the elusieve process for separating pericarp fiber from corn flour. Corn flour remaining after fiber separation was termed “enhanced corn flour”. Of the total weight of corn flour, 3.8% was obtained as fiber and 96.2% was obtained as enhanced corn flour. Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) of corn flour, fiber, and enhanced corn flour (dry basis) were 9.0, 61.5, and 5.7%, respectively. Starch content of corn flour, fiber, and enhanced corn flour (dry basis) were 68.8, 23.5, and 71.3%, respectively. Final ethanol concentration from enhanced corn flour (14.12% v/v) was marginally higher than corn flour (13.72% v/v). No difference in ethanol yields from corn flour and enhanced corn flour was observed. The combination of sieving and air classification can be used to separate pericarp fiber from corn flour. The economics of fiber separation from corn flour using the elusieve process would be governed by the production of valuable products from fiber and the revenues generated from the valuable products.     

Evaluation and Strategies to Improve Fermentation Characteristics of Modified Dry‐Grind Corn Processes

New corn fractionation technologies that produce higher value coproducts from dry‐grind processing have been developed. Wet fractionation technologies involve a short soaking of corn followed by milling to recover germ and pericarp fiber in an aqueous medium before fermentation of degermed defibered slurry. In dry fractionation technologies, a dry degerm defiber (3D) process (similar to conventional corn dry‐milling) is used to separate germ and pericarp fiber before fermentation of the endosperm fraction. The effect of dry and wet fractionation technologies on the fermentation rates and ethanol yields were studied and compared with the conventional dry‐grind process. The wet process had the highest fermentation rate. The endosperm fraction obtained from 3D process had lowest fermentation rate and highest residual sugars at the end of fermentation. Strategies to improve the fermentation characteristics of endosperm fraction from 3D process were evaluated using two saccharification and fermentation processes. The endosperm fraction obtained from 3D process was liquefied by enzymatic hydrolysis and fermented using either separate saccharification (SS) and fermentation or simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF). Corn germ soak water and B‐vitamins were added during fermentation to study the effect of micronutrient addition. Ethanol and sugar profiles were measured using HPLC. The endosperm fraction fermented using SSF produced higher ethanol yields than SS. Addition of B‐vitamins and germ soak water during SSF improved fermentation of 3D process and resulted in 2.6 and 2.3% (v/v) higher ethanol concentrations and fermentation rates compared with 3D process treatment with no addition of micronutrients.     

Comparison of Raw Starch Hydrolyzing Enzyme with Conventional Liquefaction and Saccharification Enzymes in Dry‐Grind Corn Processing

In a conventional dry‐grind corn process, starch is converted into dextrins using liquefaction enzymes at high temperatures (90–120°C) during a liquefaction step. Dextrins are hydrolyzed into sugars using saccharification enzymes during a simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) step. Recently, a raw starch hydrolyzing enzyme (RSH), Stargen 001, was developed that converts starch into dextrins at low temperatures (<48°C) and hydrolyzes dextrins into sugars during SSF. In this study, a dry‐grind corn process using RSH enzyme was compared with two combinations (DG1 and DG2) of commercial liquefaction and saccharification enzymes. Dry‐grind corn processes for all enzyme treatments were performed at the same process conditions except for the liquefaction step. For RSH and DG1 and DG2 treatments, ethanol concentrations at 72 hr of fermentation were 14.1–14.2% (v/v). All three enzyme treatments resulted in comparable ethanol conversion efficiencies, ethanol yields, and DDGS yields. Sugar profiles for the RSH treatment were different from DG1 and DG2 treatments, especially for glucose. During SSF, the highest glucose concentration for RSH treatment was 7% (w/v), whereas for DG1 and DG2 treatments, glucose concentrations had maximum of 19% (w/v). Glycerol concentrations were 0.5% (w/v) for RSH treatment and 0.8% (w/v) for DG1 and DG2 treatments.     

Enzymatic Process for Corn Dry‐Grind High‐Solids Fermentation

A modified dry‐grind process that combined the use of conventional amylases (glucoamylase [GA]), phytase, and granular starch hydrolyzing enzymes (GSHE) to achieve low liquefaction viscosities and low glucose concentrations during simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) with a high slurry solids content (>33% w/w) was developed. Doses of GSHE and GA were optimized for the modified process. At 35% solids content, the modified process had 80% lower slurry viscosity, 24% lower peak glucose concentration, 7.5% higher final ethanol concentration, and 51% higher fermentation rate compared with the conventional dry‐grind process. At 40% solids content, the modified process had lower viscosities, lower peak and residual glucose concentrations, and higher ethanol concentrations than the conventional process; however, the results were in contrast to those for 35% solids content. At 40% solids content, SSF did not run to completion for conventional or modified processes, and more than 2.5% w/v of residual glucose was left in the fermentation broth. Final ethanol concentration achieved with the modified process at 40% solids content was 19.5% v/v, similar to the ethanol concentration achieved with the modified process at 35% solids content. At 35% slurry solids content, a GSHE level of 1.25 μL/g db of corn and a GA level of 0.25 μL/g db of corn were selected as optimum enzyme doses for the modified process.     

Methods for Characterization of Residual Starch in Distiller's Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS)

The objective of this study was to establish methods for determining the content and components of residual starch in distiller's dried grains with solubles (DDGS), a coproduct from dry‐grind corn ethanol production. Four DDGS prepared in our laboratory and one DDGS obtained from a commercial ethanol manufacturer were used for the study. Quantitative analysis of total residual sugar (TRS) in DDGS was performed by determining d ‐glucose produced by enzymatic hydrolysis of oligosaccharides and residual starch remaining in hexane‐defatted DDGS after being dispersed in 90% DMSO. The TRS consisted of free glucose, oligosaccharides, and residual starch. The commercial manufacturer's DDGS contained more TRS (15.8%, w/w db) than the laboratory‐processed DDGS (2.4–2.9%, w/w db). The content of residual starch remaining in the commercial DDGS (5.5% w/w db) was also larger than the laboratory‐processed DDGS (1.9–2.5% w/w db). Analyses of molecular weight distribution showed that the residual starch in DDGS consisted of short‐chain amylose and amylopectin, respectively, as the major and minor components. The short‐chain amylose molecules constituted 86.5–94.1% of the residual starch. The major population of the short‐chain amyloses had an average degree of polymerization (DP) of 85, closely resembling the length of enzyme‐resistant fragments of amylose‐lipid complexes.     

Use of Pigmented Maize in Both Conventional Dry‐Grind and Modified Processes Using Granular Starch Hydrolyzing Enzyme

In the dry‐grind ethanol process, distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) is the main coproduct, which is primarily used as an ingredient in ruminant animal diets. Increasing the value of DDGS will improve the profitability of the dry‐grind ethanol process. One way to increase DDGS value is to use pigmented maize as the feedstock for ethanol production. Pigmented maize is rich in anthocyanin content, and the anthocyanin imparts red, blue, and purple color to the grain. It is reported that anthocyanin would be absorbed by yeast cell walls during the fermentation process. The effects of anthocyanin on fermentation characteristics in the dry‐grind process are not known. In this study, the effects of anthocyanin in conventional (conventional starch hydrolyzing enzymes) and modified (granular starch hydrolyzing enzymes [GSHE]) dry‐grind processes were evaluated. The modified process using GSHE replaced high‐temperature liquefaction. The ethanol conversion efficiencies of pigmented maize were comparable to that of yellow dent corn in both conventional (78.4 ± 0.5% for blue maize, 74.3 ± 0.4% for red maize, 81.2 ± 1.0% for purple maize, and 75.1 ± 0.2% for yellow dent corn) and modified dry‐grind processes using GSHE (83.8 ± 0.8% for blue maize, 81.1 ± 0.3% for red maize, 93.5 ± 0.8% for purple maize, and 85.6 ± 0.1% for yellow dent corn). Total anthocyanin content in DDGS from the modified process was 1.4, 1.9, and 2.4 times of that from the conventional process for purple, red, and blue maize samples, respectively. These results indicated that pigmented maize rich in anthocyanin did not negatively affect the fermentation characteristics of the dry‐grind process and that there was a potential to use pigmented maize in the dry‐grind process, especially when using GSHE.     

Effect of Harvest Moisture Content on Selected Yellow Dent Corn: Dry‐Grind Fermentation Characteristics and DDGS Composition

Efficiently utilizing the nongrain portion of the corn plant as ruminant food and the grain for ethanol will allow the optimization of both food and fuel production. Corn and corn stover could be more effectively used if they were harvested earlier before dry down. Corn harvested at different moisture contents (MCs) may exhibit different processing characteristics for the ethanol industry, because of differences in physical and chemical properties. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the effect of corn harvest MC on dry‐grind fermentation characteristics and dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) composition. Pioneer hybrid 32D78 was harvested at seven different dates from August 21 to November 23, 2009, with harvest MCs ranging from 73 to 21% (wb). The corn samples with different harvest MCs were evaluated by a conventional dry‐grind process. Final ethanol concentration from the corn with harvest MC of 54% (kernel dent stage) was 17.9% (v/v), which was significantly higher (0.5–1.2 percentage points) than the mature corn with lower harvest MCs (P < 0.05). Ethanol conversion efficiencies for the corn with harvest MCs of 73 and 54% (wb) were 98.5 and 93.2%, respectively, whereas ethanol conversion efficiencies for the corn with lower harvest MCs were significantly lower (P < 0.05), ranging between 83.2 and 88.3%. For DDGS composition, with corn harvest MC decreasing from 73 to 21% (wb), the residual starch concentration increased from 7.7 to 15.2%, the crude protein concentration decreased from 29.4 to 24.9%, and the neutral detergent fiber concentration decreased from 26.6 to 20.6%.     

Improvement of Dry‐Fractionation Ethanol Fermentation by Partial Germ Supplementation

Ethanol fermentation of dry‐fractionated grits (corn endosperm pieces) containing different levels of germ was studied with the dry‐grind process. Partial removal of the germ fraction allows for marketing the germ fraction and potentially more efficient fermentation. Grits obtained from a dry‐milling plant were mixed with different amounts of germ (2, 5, 7, and 10% germ of the total sample) and compared with control grits (0% germ). Fermentation rates of germ‐supplemented grits (2, 5, 7, and 10% germ) were faster than control grits (0% germ). Addition of 2% germ was sufficient to achieve a high ethanol concentration (19.06% v/v) compared with control grits (18.18% v/v). Fermentation of dry‐fractionated grits (92, 95, and 97% grits) obtained from a commercial facility was also compared with ground whole corn (control). Fermentation rates were slower and final ethanol concentrations were lower for commercial grits than the control sample. However, in a final experiment, commercial grits were subjected to raw starch hydrolyzing (RSH) enzyme, resulting in higher ethanol concentrations (20.22, 19.90, and 19.49% v/v for 92, 95, and 97% grits, respectively) compared with the whole corn control (18.64% v/v). Therefore, high ethanol concentrations can be achieved with dry‐fractionated grits provided the inclusion of a certain amount of germ and the use of RSH enzyme for controlled starch hydrolysis.     

Fiber Separated from Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles as a Feedstock for Ethanol Production

In the dry-grind process, corn starch is converted into sugars that are fermented into ethanol. The remaining corn components (protein, fiber, fat, and ash) form a coproduct, distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). In a previous study, the combination of sieving and elutriation (air classification), known as the elusieve process, was effective in separating fiber from DDGS. In this study, elusieve fiber was evaluated for ethanol production and results were compared with those reported in other studies for fiber from different corn processing techniques. Fiber samples were pretreated using acid hydrolysis followed by enzymatic treatment. The hydrolyzate was fermented using Escherichia coli FBR5 strain. Efficiency of ethanol production from elusieve fiber was 89–91%, similar to that for pericarp fiber from wet-milling and quick fiber processes (86–90%). Ethanol yields from elusieve fiber were 0.23–0.25 L/kg (0.027–0.030 gal/lb); similar to ethanol yields from wet-milling pericarp fiber and quick fiber. Fermentations were completed within 50 hr. Elusieve fiber conversion could result in 1.2–2.7% increase in ethanol production from dry-grind plants. It could be economically feasible to use elusieve fiber along with other feedstock in a plant producing ethanol from cellulosic feedstocks. Due to the small scale of operation and the stage of technology development for cellulosic conversion to ethanol, implementation of elusieve fiber conversion to ethanol within a dry-grind plant may not be currently economically feasible.     

Germ‐Derived FAN as Nitrogen Source for Corn Endosperm Fermentation

Corn endosperm separated by dry fractionation could exhibit poor fermentation performance due to loss of germ components beneficial for yeast growth. Inorganic nitrogen and other nutritional supplementations are used to overcome slow fermentation rates. We investigated the use of a protease in generating free amino nitrogen (FAN) from germ as an alternative to exogenous nitrogen sources. Up to 300% more FAN can be generated from germ in 6 hr of incubation with protease than without protease. Protease incubation also resulted in higher dry solids (ds) and total glucose contents in the germ hydrolyzates. During fermentation without urea addition, ethanol yields were dependent on mash FAN concentrations. Ethanol yields increased to a maximum when FAN level was 80–90 mg of FAN/100 g ds. At half the optimal FAN level (≈40 mg of FAN/100 g ds), nitrogen limitation occurred, as indicated by high residual glucose concentrations. However, germ FAN did not increase the ethanol yields compared to urea supplementation, likely because germ FAN resulted in lower substrate consumption compared to urea supplementation. Lower substrate consumption correlated to the increase in residual maltose with increase in initial FAN. Ethanol productivity in 0–24 hr of fermentation was higher with germ FAN than with urea, thus decreasing overall fermentation time.     

Physical and Chemical Characterization of Fuel Ethanol Coproducts Relevant to Value‐Added Uses

One of the fastest growing industries in the United States is the fuel ethanol industry. In terms of ethanol production capability, the industry has grown by more than 600% since the year 2000. The major coproducts from corn‐based ethanol include distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) and carbon dioxide. DDGS is used as a livestock feed because it contains high quantities of protein, fiber, amino acids, and other nutrients. The goal of this study was to quantify various chemical and physical properties of DDGS, distillers wet grains (DWG), and distillers dried grain (DDG) from several plants in South Dakota. Chemical properties of the DDGS included crude ash (5.0–21.93%), neutral detergent fiber (NDF) (26.32–43.50%), acid detergent fiber (ADF) (10.82–20.05%), crude fiber (CF) (8.14–12.82%), crude protein (27.4–31.7%), crude fat (7.4–11.6%), and total starch (9.19–14.04%). Physical properties of the DDGS included moisture content (3.54–8.21%), A_w (0.42–0.53), bulk density (467.7–509.38 kg/m³), thermal conductivity (0.05–0.07 W/m·°C), thermal diffusivity (0.1–0.17 mm²/sec), color L* (36.56–50.17), a* (5.2–10.79), b* (12.53–23.36), and angle of repose (25.7–47.04°). These properties were also determined for DWG and DDG. We also conducted image analysis and size determination of the DDGS particles. Carbon group characterization in the DDGS and DDG samples were determined using NMR spectroscopy; O‐alkyl comprised >50% of all DDGS samples. Results from this study showed several possibilities for using DDGS in applications other than animal feed. Possibilities include harvesting residual sugars, producing additional ethanol, producing value‐added compounds, using as food‐grade additives, or even using as inert fillers for biocomposites.     

Ethanol Production from Pearl Millet Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Four pearl millet genotypes were tested for their potential as raw material for fuel ethanol production in this study. Ethanol fermentation was performed both in flasks on a rotary shaker and in a 5‐L bioreactor using Saccharomyces cerevisiae (ATCC 24860). For rotary‐shaker fermentation, the final ethanol yields were 8.7–16.8% (v/v) at dry mass concentrations of 20–35%, and the ethanol fermentation efficiencies were 90.0–95.6%. Ethanol fermentation efficiency at 30% dry mass on a 5‐L bioreactor reached 94.2%, which was greater than that from fermentation in the rotary shaker (92.9%). Results showed that the fermentation efficiencies of pearl millets, on a starch basis, were comparable to those of corn and grain sorghum. Because pearl millets have greater protein and lipid contents, distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) from pearl millets also had greater protein content and energy levels than did DDGS from corn and grain sorghum. Therefore, pearl millets could be a potential feedstock for fuel ethanol production in areas too dry to grow corn and grain sorghum.