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%).     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Effect of Alternative Milling Techniques on the Yield and Composition of Corn Germ Oil and Corn Fiber Oil

The effects of alternative corn wet‐milling (intermittent milling and dynamic steeping (IMDS), gaseous SO₂ and alkali wet‐milling) and dry grind ethanol (quick germ and quick fiber with chemicals) production technologies were evaluated on the yield and phytosterol composition (ferulate phytosterol esters, free phytosterols, and fatty acyl phytosterol esters) of corn germ and fiber oil and compared with the conventional wet‐milling process. Small but statistically significant effects were observed on the yield and composition of corn germ and fiber oil with these alternative milling technologies. The results showed that the germ and fiber fractions from two of the alternative wet‐milling technologies (the gaseous SO₂ and the IMDS) had, for almost all of the individual phytosterol compounds, either comparable or signficantly higher yields compared with the conventional wet‐milling process. Also, both of the modified dry grind ethanol processes (the quick germ and quick fiber) with chemicals (SO₂ and lactic acid) can be used as a new source of corn germ and fiber and can produce oils with high yields of phytosterols. The alkali wet‐milling process showed significantly lower yields of phytosterols compounds in germ but showed significantly higher yield of free phytosterols, fatty acyl phytosterol esters and total phytosterols in the fiber fraction.     

Corn Endosperm Fermentation Using Endogenous Amino Nitrogen Generated by a Fungal Protease

Fractionating the corn kernel to separate endosperm from germ and pericarp improves corn ethanol processing by increasing fermentation throughput and generating salable coproducts. One fractionation technology, dry fractionation (DF), suffers from loss of germ‐derived nutrients and amino acids, resulting in poor fermentation performance. Such deficiencies may be addressed by increasing nitrogen and other nutritional supplementation. As an alternative to exogenous nitrogen source, we investigated the use of a fungal protease to generate free amino nitrogen (FAN) from corn endosperm. Incubation of endosperm with protease did not affect subsequent liquefaction and saccharification. FAN supplementation through proteolysis resulted in fermentation being 99% complete in 48 hr, compared to 93% maximum with urea supplementation. Viable cell growth rates were similar in FAN and urea‐supplemented fermentations. Urea and FAN addition resulted in similar fermentation characteristics and similar FAN consumption rates as with FAN alone, which was indicative that FAN was assimilated preferentially. Increased amounts of maltose remaining after fermentation were correlated with initial FAN concentrations in mash. This observed trend was implicated in ethanol yield reduction of 2 g/L at high protease loading (generating 1.6 mg of FAN/g of glucose substrate) compared to a urea control. Using a glucose and maltose solution, we confirmed higher residual maltose in fermentations supplemented with high FAN concentrations. Use of protease to generate optimal FAN concentration in mash (1.2 mg of FAN/g of glucose substrate) could improve economics of dry fractionated corn ethanol production by increasing fermentation rates and, consequently, reducing fermentation time.     

Dry‐Milling and Fractionation of Transgenic Maize Seed Tissues with Green Fluorescent Protein as a Tissue Marker

The efficiency of fractionating cereal grains (e.g., dry corn milling) can be evaluated and monitored by quantifying the proportions of seed tissues in each of the recovered fractions. The quantities of individual tissues are typically estimated using indirect methods such as quantifying fiber or ash to indicate pericarp and tip cap contents, and oil to indicate germ content. More direct and reliable methods are possible with tissue‐specific markers. We used two transgenic maize lines, one containing the fluorescent protein green fluorescent protein (GFP) variant S65T expressed in endosperm, and the other containing GFP expressed in germ to determine the fate of each tissue in the dry‐milling fractionation process. The two lines were dry‐milled to produce three fractions (bran‐, endosperm‐, and germ‐rich fractions) and GFP fluorescence was quantified in each fraction to estimate the tissue composition. Using a simplified laboratory dry‐milling procedure and our GFP‐containing grain, we determined that the endosperm‐rich fraction contained 4% germ tissue, the germ‐rich fraction contained 28% germ, 20% endosperm, and 52% nonendosperm and nonembryo tissues, and the bran‐rich fraction contained 44% endosperm, 13% germ, and 43% nonendosperm and nonembryo tissues. GFP‐containing grain can be used to optimize existing fractionation methods and to develop improved processing strategies.     

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.     

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%.     

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.     

Laboratory Measurement of Yield and Composition of Dry‐Milled Corn Fractions Using a Shortened,Single‐Stage Tempering Procedure

The objective was to describe a laboratory‐scale dry‐milling procedure that used single‐stage tempering and determine the effect of hybrid on yields and fraction compositions in milled corn. Samples of 11 commercially available hybrids were processed through a laboratory dry‐milling procedure that used 1 kg samples of corn to produce milling fractions of large grits, small grits, fines, germ, and pericarp. Compositions of milling fractions (protein, neutral detergent fiber, ash, and crude fat) were determined. The procedure used a single‐stage tempering step that increased corn moisture from 15 to 23.5% wb during an 18‐min tempering period. Germ were separated from endosperm particles using a roller mill followed by screening over a sieve with 1.68‐mm openings. Coefficients of variability were small, indicating acceptable repeatability. Overall yield means were 39.2, 25.3, 13.8, 78.2, 14.3, and 6.8 g/100 g (db) for large grits, small grits, fines, total endosperm, germ, and pericarp, respectively. There were effects due to hybrid (P < 0.05) on fraction yields and compositions of milling fractions. Correlations (r) among endosperm fractions (large grits, small grits, and fines) ranged from 0.54 to |–0.92|. Correlations among endosperm fractions and germ and pericarp were <0.68. The developed dry‐milling method estimated milling yields among hybrids with low standard deviations relative to the means and should be a useful tool for research and industry in measuring dry‐milling characteristics.     

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.     

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.     

Use of Phytases in Ethanol Production from E‐Mill Corn Processing

Effects of phytase addition, germ, and pericarp fiber recovery were evaluated for the E‐Mill dry grind corn process. In the E‐Mill process, corn was soaked in water followed by incubation with starch hydrolyzing enzymes. For each phytase treatment, an additional phytase incubation step was performed before incubation with starch hydrolyzing enzymes. Germ and pericarp fiber were recovered after incubation with starch hydrolyzing enzymes. Preliminary studies on phytase addition resulted in germ with higher oil (40.9%), protein (20.0%), and lower residual starch (12.2%) contents compared to oil (39.1%), protein (19.2%), and starch (18.1%) in germ from the E‐Mill process without phytase addition. Phytase treatment resulted in lower residual starch contents in pericarp fiber (19.9%) compared to pericarp fiber without phytase addition (27.4%). Results obtained led to further investigation of effects of phytase on final ethanol concentrations, germ, pericarp fiber, and DDGS recovery. Final ethanol concentrations were higher in E‐Mill processing with phytase addition (17.4% v/v) than without addition of phytase (16.6% v/v). Incubation with phytases resulted in germ with 4.3% higher oil and 2.5% lower residual starch content compared to control process. Phytase treatment also resulted in lower residual starch and higher protein contents (6.58 and 36.5%, respectively) in DDGS compared to DDGS without phytase incubations (8.14 and 34.2%, respectively). Phytase incubation in E‐Mill processing may assist in increasing coproduct values as well as lead to increased ethanol concentrations.     

Fate of Bt Protein and Influence of Corn Hybrid on Ethanol Production

Corn hybrids were compared to determine the fate of recombinant Bt protein (CRY1Ab from Bacillus thuringiensis) in coproducts from dry grind and wet‐milled corn during production of fuel ethanol. Two pairs of Bt and non‐Bt hybrids were wet milled, and each fraction was examined for the presence of the Bt protein. Bt protein was found in the germ, gluten, and fiber fractions of Bt hybrids. In addition, one set of Bt and non‐Bt hybrids were treated by the dry‐grind ethanol process and Bt protein was monitored during each step of the process. The Bt protein was not detected after liquefaction. Subsequent experiments determined that the Bt protein is rapidly denatured at liquefaction temperatures. Finally, five hybrids were compared for ethanol yield after dry grinding. Analysis of fermentation data with an F‐test revealed the percent of total starch available for conversion into ethanol varied significantly among the hybrids (P < 0.002), indicating ethanol yield is not exclusively dependent on starch content. No difference, however, was observed between Bt and non‐Bt corn hybrids for either ethanol productivity or yield.     

Effects of Different Mill Types on Ethanol Production Using Uncooked Dry‐Grind Fermentation and Characteristics of Residual Starch in Distiller's Dried Grains (DDG)

This study aimed to investigate impacts of milling methods on ethanol production using an uncooked dry‐grind (cold fermentation) process and characterize residual starch in the distiller's dried grains (DDG) coproduct. Four corn lines with different chemical compositions were ground with cyclone, ultra‐centrifugal, or hammer mills equipped with a screen of 0.5 mm opening and used for the cold fermentation process. Greater starch hydrolysis and ethanol yield were obtained from cyclone‐milled corn, resulting from larger damaged starch contents and smaller particle sizes of the ground corn. Corn grains and ground corn after five‐month storage showed less starch hydrolysis than the freshly ground counterpart. Residual starch (2.8–8.0%) with large proportions of intact amylopectin contents (up to 42.5%) was found in the DDG from all types of milling. The results suggested that the entrapment of starch granules in ground corn and a low activity of amylolytic enzymes at a high ethanol concentration were accountable for the remaining of starch in the DDG.     

Dry‐Grind Processing of Corn with Endogenous Liquefaction Enzymes

An amylase corn has been developed that produces an α‐amylase enzyme that is activated in the presence of water at elevated temperatures (>70°C). Amylase corn in the dry‐grind process was evaluated and compared with the performance of exogenous amylases used in dry‐grind processing. Amylase corn (1–10% by weight) was added to dent corn (of the same genetic background as the amylase corn) as treatments and resulting samples were evaluated for dry‐grind ethanol fermentation using 150‐g and 3‐kg laboratory procedures. Ethanol concentrations during fermentation were compared with the control treatment (0% amylase corn addition or 100% dent corn) which was processed with a conventional amount of exogenous α‐amylase enzymes used in the dry‐grind corn process. The 1% amylase corn treatment (adding 1% amylase corn to dent corn) was sufficient to liquefy starch into dextrins. Following fermentation, ethanol concentrations from the 1% amylase corn treatment were similar to that of the control. Peak and breakdown viscosities of liquefied slurries for all amylase corn treatments were significantly higher than the control treatment. In contrast, final viscosities of liquefied slurries for all amylase corn treatments were lower than those of the control. Protein, fat, ash, and crude fiber contents of DDGS samples from the 3% amylase corn treatment and control were similar.     

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.     

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.