International Journal of Chemical Engineering
Volume 2020 (2020), Article ID 5084036, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5084036

Research Article

Kinetic Models for Glucosamine Production by Acid Hydrolysis of Chitin in Five Mushrooms

Pin Zhang1,2 and Manote Sutheerawattananonda¹

¹School of Food Technology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, 111 University Avenue, Muang District, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
²Guizhou Rapeseed Institute, Guizhou Province Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 270-0061 Baiyun Road, Jinyang District, Guiyang, Guizhou 550008, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Pin Zhang; zhangpin19840810@126.com

Received 12 October 2019; Accepted 26 December 2019; Published 11 January 2020

Academic Editor: Prem Kumar Seelam

Copyright © 2020 Pin Zhang and Manote Sutheerawattananonda. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

In this paper, glucosamine was produced by acid hydrolysis of five mushrooms. The glucosamine yields were investigated, and the optimum conditions were obtained as follows: acid type, sulfuric acid; acid concentration, 6 M; ratio of raw material to acid volume, 1 : 10; hydrolysis temperature, 100°C; and time, 6 h. Under these conditions, the glucosamine conversion from chitin content reached up to 92%. The results of hydrolysis kinetics indicated that hydrolysis of five mushrooms to glucosamine followed zero-order kinetics. Moreover, the relatively low activation energy for hydrolysis of straw mushroom (18.31 kJ/mol) and the highest glucosamine yield (56.8132 ± 3.5748 mg/g DM, 0.9824 g/g chitin) indicated that hydrolysis of straw mushroom was energy-saving. Thus, sulfuric acid hydrolysis of straw mushroom for glucosamine production should be considered as an efficient process for the future industrial application. However, further study is needed for glucosamine purification.

1. Introduction

Chitin, the well-known natural biopolymer, has been widely applied in food, pharmaceutical, and biotechnological industries owing to its nontoxicity, biodegradability, and biocompatibility [1]. Nowadays, most of the commercial sources of chitin are crab and shrimp shells. However, in nature, chitin occurs not only in the exoskeleton of arthropods but also in the cell walls of fungi and yeast [1–3]. Therefore, fungi can be considered as the potential candidate for the production of chitin. Mushrooms, one of the most known fungi, have been consumed throughout the world for many centuries [4]. Besides their nutritional value, they exhibit therapeutic and medical properties related to preventing various diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and several types of cancer [5–7]. In addition, the chitin content of mushrooms has been reported in the range of 0.3–19.6% DW (dry weight) [3, 8].

Chitin has several applications when converted into its oligomers and monomers, such as glucosamine (2-amino-2-deoxy-D-glucose). In recent years, glucosamine with well-studied efficacy and satisfied safety has been widely used as a dietary supplement for osteoarthritis treatment [9]. It is a well-known fact that the hydrolysis of chitin with concentrated acids yields the formation of glucosamine [1]. For industrial production of glucosamine, concentrated hydrochloric acid is usually employed to hydrolyze chitin [10]. However, this method has low yield (below 65%) [11]. Another concern is the high content of sodium chloride in the finally product may increase the cost of production and the risk of some diseases, such as stroke, heart failure, osteoporosis, stomach cancer, and kidney disease [12]. Alternatively, previous studies have reported that sulfuric acid could be employed for hydrolysis of chitin and other biopolymers [1, 13–15].

According to the literature review, production of glucosamine by acid-catalyzed hydrolysis of chitin in mushrooms is feasible. However, no study has been conducted to compare the efficiency of different acids for glucosamine production, and little is known about the optimum conditions and kinetics for acid hydrolysis of mushrooms. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare the acid-hydrolysis efficiencies of hydrochloric and sulfuric acids, to optimize the hydrolysis conditions, and to investigate the kinetic models.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials and Chemicals

Five species of edible mushrooms that are widely used for human consumption were selected in this study. These include enoki mushroom (Flammulina velutipes) (fresh), oyster mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus) (fresh), straw mushroom (Volvariella volvacea) (fresh), shiitake (Lentinus edodes) (dried), and wood ear mushroom (Auricularia auricular) (dried). The mushrooms were purchased from a local market in Nakhon Ratchasima province, Thailand. The three fresh mushrooms, namely, enoki mushroom, oyster mushroom, straw mushroom, were washed, cut into small pieces and dried in a Gamma 2–16 LSC freeze-drier (Martin Christ GmbH, Osterode am Harz, Germany). In the freeze-drying process, mushroom pieces were frozen at −85°C for 1 h in the freeze-drier chamber, dried at −65°C for 72 h, and then finally dried at 30°C for 24 h. The entire process was carried out at −85°C cold collector temperature and 0.001 mbar chamber pressure. After freeze-drying, five dried mushrooms were ground using an IKA-WERKE M20 universal laboratory miller with a cooling jacket and 4-edged blade and then sieved to obtain a fraction below 40-mesh. The ground mushroom samples were well-sealed in the plastic bags and kept at 4°C throughout the study.

N-(9H-Fluoren-2-ylmethoxycarbonyloxy) succinimide (FMOC-Su) (98% purity) and D-(+)-glucosamine hydrochloride (minimum 99% purity) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Chemical Company (St. Louis, MO, USA). Triethylamine, trifluoroacetic acid, and acetonitrile were of HPLC grade while all other chemicals used were of analytical grade.

2.2. Mushroom Hydrolysis

Acid hydrolysis of mushrooms was performed with a Gerhardt Kjeldatherm digestion unit equipped with a digital temperature controller (Gerhardt GmbH & Co. KG, Königswinter, Germany) according to the method described in our previous study [16]. Firstly, the efficiency of hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid for glucosamine production was investigated. Based on the previous reported conditions of hydrochloric acid hydrolysis, the parameters selected for the comparison were as follows: ratio of raw material to acid volume (1 : 10, w/v), acid concentration (6 M), hydrolysis temperature (80°C), and hydrolysis time (8 h) [17]. Mean values of glucosamine yield from all acid hydrolysis conditions were compared. Further study was conducted to determine the optimum condition for sulfuric acid hydrolysis conditions of the mushrooms. One Variable at a Time (OVAT) was used to select the optimum conditions for sulfuric acid hydrolysis of mushrooms. Several experimental parameters such as acid concentration (1, 2, 4, 6, and 9 M), ratio of raw material, and acid volume (w/v, 1 : 5, 1 : 10; 1 : 15, 1 : 20, 1 : 25, 1 : 30 and 1 : 35), hydrolysis temperature (40, 60, 80, 90, 100, and 110°C), and hydrolysis time (0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 12, 15, 18, 24, 36, and 48 h) were examined. Aliquots were periodically taken from the reaction mixture, cooled at 4°C, and neutralized with calcium carbonate. The neutralized hydrolysate was used for glucosamine quantitative determination.

2.3. Analytical Methods

The crude chitin content of mushroom samples was measured based on the residual mass after extraction. The extraction procedure was adapted from the study of Ifuku et al. [2]. Ground samples were deproteinized by 2% NaOH for 24 h at 90°C and demineralized by 2 M HCl for 48 h at room temperature. After washing with deionized water for 5 times, the residue was dried at 70°C in a vacuum oven for 24 h. The measurements were repeated 3 times. The average values of chitin content were reported and used for the calculation of glucosamine yield and conversion.

Glucosamine was determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) according to the AOAC official method 2005.01 with minor modification [16, 18, 19]. Briefly, 0.75 μL trimethylamine was added to 1 mL sample solution and the mixture was allowed to react for at least 12 h at room temperature. Subsequently, a 100 μL portion was mixed with 0.5 mL 15 mM FMOC-Su and reacted in the sonicator water bath at 50°C for 30 min. After that, 4 mL mixture of mobile phases A (water containing 0.05% trifluoroacetic acid, pH 2.4)/B (acetonitrile) (1/1, v/v) was added. Chromatographic separation was conducted on a ZORBAZ ODS C18 column (5 μm particle size, 250 × 4.6 mm I. D.), employing a C18 precolumn guard cartridge. The column temperature was maintained at 30°C. Detection was performed at a wavelength (λ) of 265 nm with an analytical time of 17 min. Samples were eluted with the gradient mode at a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min. The mobile phase consisted of A (0.05% trifluoroacetic acid in DI water, pH 2.4)/B (acetonitrile), which was programmed with a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min as follows: 0–6 min, 30% B; 6–11 min, 30–100% B; 11–15 min, 100–30% B; 15–17 min, 30% B. A calibration curve was prepared from glucosamine chloride standards (20–120 μg/mL).

The glucosamine yield is defined as

where Mg represents the mass of glucosamine in the mushroom hydrolysate and MS represents the mass of mushroom sample.

The glucosamine conversion is defined as

where Mg represents the mass of glucosamine in the mushroom hydrolysate, Mc represents the mass of chitin in the mushroom sample, and 0.973 is the conversion factor from glucosamine to chitin.

2.4. Kinetic Models

For kinetics study, 10 g ground mushroom sample was hydrolyzed following the addition of 100 mL 6 M sulfuric acid and heat (90, 100, or 110°C). During the 6 h hydrolysis, the subsamples were taken at 30 min intervals. Due to the difficulty in finding a strict mechanism for hydrolysis reactions, it is practical to use simplified models for the determination of kinetics [13]. EXCEL was employed for fitting the mathematical reaction models (zero-, first-, and second-order kinetics) to the experimental data. For a simple zero-order reaction, a plot of [A] versus time would be linear, for a simple first-order reaction, a plot of versus time would be linear, and for a second-order reaction, a plot of 1/[A] would be linear [20–22].

Arrhenius’ equation gives the dependence of the rate constant of a chemical reaction on the absolute temperature, a pre-exponential factor, and other constants of the reaction:

where k is the rate constant; T is the absolute temperature (in Kelvin); A is the pre-exponential factor, a constant for each chemical reaction that defines the rate due to frequency of collisions in the correct orientation; Ea is the activation energy for the reaction (in J/mol or kJ/mol); and R is the universal gas constant, 8.3144598 J/mol/K.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effects of Acid Hydrolysis Parameters on Glucosamine Yield

In order to investigate the hydrolysis efficiency of hydrochloric and sulfuric acids for glucosamine production, the glucosamine yields of five mushrooms by hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid hydrolysis were compared. The glucosamine yields obtained from sulfuric acid hydrolysis were numerically higher than the values from hydrochloric acid (2.09–4.05 times) (Figure 1). To test the hypothesis that glucosamine yield from sulfuric acid hydrolysis (n = 6, M = 27.9988, SD = 24.5809) were statistically higher than that from hydrochloric acid hydrolysis (n = 6, M = 6.7367, SD = 2.8095), an independent t test was conducted. The assumption of homogeneity of variances was tested and satisfied via Levene’s F test, F (10) = 4.335, . The glucosamine yield from sulfuric acid hydrolysis was statistically significant higher than that from hydrochloric acid hydrolysis, t (10) = 2.105, (one-tailed). This indicates that sulfuric acid has stronger ability than hydrochloric acid to convert chitin into glucosamine from five mushrooms. These findings are similar to the previous studies that sulfuric acid is more efficient for polymer degradation [14, 23, 24]. In the study of Lavarack et al. [23], sulfuric acid was found to be more active for the formation of xylose from sugarcane bagasse hemicellulose compared to hydrochloric acid. Similarly, Meinita et al. [14] found that sulfuric acid was more active at hydrolyzing Kappaphycus alvarezii. Conversely, Herrera et al. [25] reported that hydrochloric acid was more powerful as the catalyst in the hydrolysis of sorghum straw than sulfuric acid. Therefore, the raw material type played an important role in the efficiency of acid hydrolysis. The better catalytic effect of sulfuric acid than hydrochloric acid for the production of glucosamine from the same mushroom sample could be explained by that the molar amount of hydrogen ions in sulfuric acid is twice that of hydrochloric acid. Ravens [26] explained that the hydrolysis of poly (ethylene terephthalate) (PET) is principally determined by the solubility of PET in hydrochloric acid. Similarly, in this study, the quicker dissolution rate and higher solubility of mushroom samples in sulfuric acid may lead to higher glucosamine yield from sulfuric acid hydrolysis.

Figure 1: Effects of hydrochloric and sulfuric acids on glucosamine yield. Hydrolysis conditions: ratio of raw material to acid volume (1 : 10, w/v), 6 M acid, 80°C, and 8 h.

To obtain the maximum glucosamine yield, it was of interest to investigate the effects of different hydrolysis conditions on glucosamine yields. The concentration of sulfuric acid plays important role in the hydrolysis efficiency, and too high or too low acid concentration can decrease the glucosamine yield. As shown in Figure 2(a), the glucosamine yield increased when the sulfuric acid concentration was increased from 1 to 6 M. As discussed before, hydrogen ions played an important role during hydrolysis. The molar amount of hydrogen ions increased with the increasing acid concentration; therefore, the glucosamine yield increased with the increasing acid concentration. A further increase in sulfuric acid concentration (6 to 9 M) did not enhance the yield of glucosamine indicating that the molar amount of hydrogen ions reached saturation in the hydrolysis system. On the other hand, there is no significant difference between different ratios of raw material to acid volume (Figure 2(b)), which means the selected minimum acid volume (5 mL) already provides enough solvent volume and catalytic hydrogen ions for the reaction. Hydrolysis temperature had an important impact on glucosamine yield because that temperature affected the catalytic ability of sulfuric acid. The glucosamine yield was increased when the hydrolysis temperature increased. When the temperature was increased from 90°C to 110°C, there was no significant improvement of glucosamine yield (Figure 2(c)). The enhancement of glucosamine yield at higher temperatures could be attributed to the increase of catalytic efficiency with the increase of temperature. On the other hand, the elevated temperatures softened the cell wall matrices of chitin, proteins, and glucans and allowed the acid to hydrolyze chitin to form glucosamine [2, 23]. To investigate the effect of hydrolysis time on glucosamine yield, the glucosamine yield was monitored for 48 h. Because there were abundant reaction substrates in the solution, the reaction rate was faster; as the reaction progressed, the chitin amount became less and less and the reaction rate was lower. Therefore, there was an obvious increase within 1 h and a relatively slow increase from 1 to 6 h. It was identified that the acid hydrolysis was finished in 6 h, after which no significant change of the glucosamine yield was found (Figure 2(d)). Therefore, the optimum hydrolysis time was judged at 6 h.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 2: Effects of sulfuric acid concentration, ratio of raw material to acid volume, hydrolysis temperature, and time on glucosamine yield. (a) Sulfuric acid concentration; (b) ratio of raw material to acid volume; (c) hydrolysis temperature; (d) hydrolysis time. Shared letters indicate means that are not significantly different () by one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s HSD.

Under the optimum conditions, namely, dry mushroom sample, ratio of raw material to acid volume, 1 : 10; sulfuric acid concentration, 6 M; hydrolysis temperature, 100°C; and time, 6 h, the hydrolysis of five mushrooms were conducted and the conversions and glucosamine yields were calculated (Table 1).

Table 1: The chitin content, glucosamine yield, and conversion of five mushrooms under optimum conditions.

Mushroom
Chitin content (mg/g DM)
Glucosamine yield (mg/g DM)
Glucosamine yield (g/g chitin)
Conversion (%)

Enoki mushroom
26.43 ± 1.2061
25.2615 ± 1.2479b
0.9558
93.00

Oyster mushroom
27.03 ± 0.0070
26.9934 ± 0.4778b
0.9986
97.17

Straw mushroom
57.83 ± 2.3227
56.8132 ± 3.5748d
0.9824
95.59

Shiitake
38.52 ± 1.7264
37.4460 ± 1.1173c
0.9721
94.59

Wood ear mushroom
12.96 ± 1.0074
12.3593 ± 1.1899a
0.9536
92.79

Hydrolysis conditions: dry mushroom sample; ratio of raw material to acid volume, 1 : 10; sulfuric acid concentration, 6 M; hydrolysis temperature, 100°C; and time, 6 h.

Values in 3th column followed by different superscript letters indicate significant differences () between samples when analyzed by one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s HSD test.

Among the five mushrooms used in this study, the results from one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s HSD test revealed that straw mushroom had the highest glucosamine yield (56.8132 ± 3.1671 mg/g DM). It indicated that straw mushroom had the highest chitin content among these five mushrooms (Table 1), and it could be considered as a better source of chitin for the production of glucosamine. Moreover, the relatively high conversion in five tested mushrooms (greater than 95%) implied sulfuric acid hydrolysis was an effective method for glucosamine production (Figure 1 and Table 1). The choice of suitable acid and control of hydrolysis conditions are crucial for the production of glucosamine. Our results indicated that the chitin content of mushroom was a crucial factor for glucosamine yield. As compared to crustacean shells, the traditional and current commercial source of glucosamine, mushrooms exhibited lower glucosamine yields which are attributed to the difference in chitin contents of raw materials. However, the supply of crustacean shells can be limited and potentially toxic due to heavy metal and pesticide contamination like typical seafood fish [27, 28]. Furthermore, the production of glucosamine from crustacean shells usually needs extra pretreatment including deproteinization, demineralization, and depigmentation [29]. On the other hand, mushrooms can be organically cultivated throughout the year in a short period without geographical and seasonal restrictions. Additionally, mushrooms are relatively consistent in composition and are not associated with inorganic materials; thus, no demineralization treatment is required and the heavy metal hazard can be avoided [3]. Moreover, glucosamine from mushrooms is suitable for vegetarians and shellfish-allergic consumers. Therefore, mushrooms’ potential as an economical and low-cost source of glucosamine should be encouraged.

3.2. Kinetic Models

Due to the difficulty in finding a strict mechanism for hydrolysis reactions, it is usual to use simplified models to determine the kinetics [23, 30]. The initial stage of the hydrolysis was fitted with three reaction models, respectively. [A]₀ was calculated based on the determined chitin content of each mushroom, and [A]t = the difference between original chitin concentration and liberated glucosamine at reaction time t. The kinetic equations and corresponding coefficient of determination (R²) are listed in Table 2. It can be concluded that most of the hydrolysis of five mushrooms to glucosamine followed the zero-order kinetics. The hydrolysis of straw mushroom, shiitake, and wood ear mushroom were well-fitted with zero-order reaction model. Hydrolysis of enoki mushroom and oyster mushroom at 90°C was the first-order reaction, while that at 100°C and 110°C fitted well with the zero-order model. The coefficient of determination and correlation coefficients are all above 0.9 indicating agreements between the experimental data and the kinetic models are good.

Table 2: Fitting of experimental results to different reaction models.

Mushroom
Temperature (°C)
Reaction kinetic equation
Coefficient of determination (R²)

Enoki mushroom
90
Zero-order

0.9569

First-order

0.9591

Second-order

0.6460

100
Zero-order

0.9475

First-order

0.9358

Second-order

0.5367

110
Zero-order

0.9623

First-order

0.9273

Second-order

0.5263

Oyster mushroom
90
Zero-order

0.9592

First-order

0.9886

Second-order

0.8856

100
Zero-order

0.9380

First-order

0.7945

Second-order

0.2831

110
Zero-order

0.8642

First-order

0.6013

Second-order

0.2163

Straw mushroom
90
Zero-order

0.9586

First-order

0.8902

Second-order

0.7658

100
Zero-order

0.9833

First-order

0.8779

Second-order

0.6756

110
Zero-order

0.9803

First-order

0.8194

Second-order

0.5223

Shiitake
90
Zero-order

0.9979

First-order

0.9707

Second-order

0.8737

100
Zero-order

0.9913

First-order

0.933

Second-order

0.7393

110
Zero-order

0.9914

First-order

0.9355

Second-order

0.7471

Wood ear mushroom
90
Zero-order

0.9281

First-order

0.8191

Second-order

0.6934

100
Zero-order

0.9469

First-order

0.8087

Second-order

0.4911

110
Zero-order

0.9148

First-order

0.8416

Second-order

0.6206

[A]₀ is the initial chitin content of each mushroom and [A] is the chitin content at reaction time t.

As shown in Table 2, using 6 M sulfuric acid, the effect of temperature on glucosamine yield was investigated, and the temperature efficients (Q₁₀), which represented the relative change in glucosamine production rate as a result of increasing the temperature by 10°C, are listed in Table 3. The Q₁₀ factors between 90°C and 100°C were higher than the values between 100°C and 110°C which showed that the glucosamine yields and the reaction rate were increased drastically when the temperature increased from 90°C to 100°C, especially enoki mushroom and oyster mushroom. The results indicate that when the temperature is higher than 100°C, the change in temperature would not have significant effect on glucosamine yield.

Table 3: The kinetics parameters for mushroom hydrolysis.

Raw material
Temperature (°C)
K (1/min)
Q₁₀
Ea (kJ/mol)

Enoki mushroom
90
0.0107

113.00

100
0.0764
7.1402

110
0.0734
0.9607

Oyster mushroom
90
0.0076

131.00

100
0.0716
9.4211

110
0.0709
0.9902

Straw mushroom
90
0.1178

18.31

100
0.1532
1.3005

110
0.1611
1.0516

Shiitake
90
0.0988

6.64

100
0.107
1.0830

110
0.1107
1.0346

Wood ear mushroom
90
0.043

18.51

100
0.0567
1.3186

110
0.059
1.0406

According to Arrhenius’ equation, a plot of the natural logarithm of the rate constants as a function of the inverse of the absolute temperature (Arrhenius plot) can be drawn and the activation energy required for glucosamine conversion can be calculated from the slope of the line. The rate constant k and activation energy (Ea) for glucosamine were calculated and summarized in Table 3. The activation energies were in the range of 6.64–131.00 kJ/mol. Hydrolysis of shiitake exhibited the lowest activation energy, which may indicate that shiitake was easier to hydrolyze than other four mushrooms under the sulfuric acid hydrolysis conditions.

The activation energies for sulfuric acid hydrolysis of three mushrooms, namely, straw mushroom, shiitake, and wood ear mushroom, were lower than the activation energy of 78 kJ/mol of chitosan reported by Yan and Evenocheck [31]. An activation energy value of 131.00 kJ/mol has been determined for hydrolysis of oyster mushroom, showing a relative difficult tendency for glucosamine to be liberated. However, this value was lower than the activation energies for hydrolysis of chitin in hydrochloric acid [31, 32]. The reason may be that, as mentioned before, sulfuric acid was more effective than hydrochloric acid. Vårum et al. [32] have reported the activation energies for acid hydrolysis of two almost fully de-N-acetylated chitosans were 152.2 and 158.1 kJ/mol, respectively. The activation energies for acid hydrolysis of two partially N-acetylated chitosans were also determined to be 130.4 and 134.3 kJ/mol, respectively. In addition, at the beginning (up to 1.5 h) of the hydrolysis of wood ear mushroom, the reaction rate was almost zero (Figure 3). This phenomenon may be explained by the higher amount of glucans, and the strong bonding strength the chitin-glucan complex exist in wood ear mushroom [33].

Figure 3: Stability of glucosamine standard and glucosamine conversion from five mushrooms under optimum hydrolysis conditions (100°C, 6 M H₂SO₄).

3.3. Glucosamine Decomposition

Due to the deamination of glucosamine during acid hydrolysis, it is important to minimize the glucosamine decomposition to obtain an accurate result for kinetics study [1, 21]. To monitor the decomposition, glucosamine standards were weighed into digestion flasks and treated under the optimum hydrolysis condition (100°C, 6 M H₂SO₄). At the end of each half-hour interval, a sample was taken and analyzed for glucosamine content. The results are shown in Figure 3.

The degradation of glucosamine fits a zero-order decomposition model. About 15.01%, 19.86%, and 21.04% of glucosamine were lost at hydrolysis time of 4.5, 6, and 6.5 h, respectively. On the other hand, after 6 h hydrolysis, about 90% chitin in mushroom could be converted into glucosamine and a loss of 20% glucosamine might be observed according to the decomposition model. To minimize the glucosamine loss during hydrolysis, shorter hydrolysis time, higher temperature, or higher acid concentration might be employed. However, the decomposition kinetics during the mushroom hydrolysis process can be complicated through the processes of chitin depolymerization and deacetylation, which is followed by the glucosamine generation. The glucosamine decomposition during mushroom hydrolysis does not appear to have a significant impact. According to the decomposition model, 20% of glucosamine was lost after 6 h hydrolysis. However, the glucosamine conversions from five mushrooms were above 92% (Table 1), which were experimentally close to the chitin content of five mushrooms. This demonstrates that the decomposition of glucosamine during mushroom hydrolysis at the optimal conditions should have minimal impact on the accuracy of results.

4. Conclusion

From the results reported in this work, it can be concluded that sulfuric acid was an effective catalyst for glucosamine production. The maximum glucosamine conversion of 99.86% was achieved by employing the optimum conditions, which were hydrolysis temperature of 100°C, time of 6 h, and sulfuric acid concentration of 6 M. The hydrolysis kinetics of five mushrooms was studied. The values of activation energy were in the range of 6.64–131.00 kJ/mol. Shiitake was easiest to hydrolyze among the five mushrooms, while oyster mushroom exhibited the most difficult tendency for glucosamine to be liberated. Since the higher amount of glucans and the strong bonding strength the chitin-glucan complex exist in wood ear mushroom, the reaction rate at the beginning (up to 1.5 h) was almost zero. The relatively low activation energy for hydrolysis of straw mushroom (18.31 kJ/mol) and the highest glucosamine yield (56.8132 ± 3.5748 mg/g DM, 0.9824 g/g chitin) indicated that hydrolysis of straw mushroom was energy-saving. Thus, sulfuric acid hydrolysis of straw mushroom for glucosamine production could be considered as an efficient process for the future industrial application, and further study was required to get higher glucosamine purity from suitable purification procedure.

Nomenclature

A: | Pre-exponential factor
ANOVA: | Analysis of variance
AOAC: | Association of Official Analytical Chemists
°C: | Degree Celsius
DI: | Deionized
DW: | Dry weight
Ea: | Activation energy
FMOC-Su: | N-(9H-fluoren-2-ylmethoxycarbonyloxy) succinimide
h: | Hour
HPLC: | High-performance liquid chromatography
I. D.: | Internal diameter
k: | Reaction rate
min: | Minute
OVAT: | One Variable at a Time
Q₁₀: | Temperature efficient
R: | Universal gas constant
R²: | Coefficient of determination
SD: | Standard deviation
T: | Absolute temperature (in Kelvin)
v: | Volume
w: | Weight.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

Financial supports from the Suranaree University of Technology and Guizhou Science and Technology Support Program (Grant No. Qiankehezhicheng[2019]2400) are gratefully acknowledged.

References

N. V. Shabrukova, L. M. Shestakova, D. R. Zainetdinova, and V. S. Gamayurova, “Research of acid hydrolyses of chitin-glucan and chitosan-glucan complexes, chemistry and computational Simulation,” Butlerov Communications, vol. 2, pp. 57–59, 2002.

S. Ifuku, R. Nomura, M. Morimoto, and H. Saimoto, “Preparation of chitin nanofibers from mushrooms,” Materials, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 1417–1425, 2011.

F. D. Mario, P. Rapanà, U. Tomati, and E. Galli, “Chitin and chitosan from basidiomycetes,” International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 8–12, 2008.

C. Phat, B. Moon, and C. Lee, “Evaluation of umami taste in mushroom extracts by chemical analysis, sensory evaluation, and an electronic tongue system,” Food Chemistry, vol. 192, pp. 1068–1077, 2016.

S. Konno, K. Chu, N. Feuer, J. Phillips, and M. Choudhury, “Potent anticancer effects of bioactive mushroom extracts (Phellinus linteus) on a variety of human cancer cells,” Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 76–82, 2015.

N. F. M. Yahaya, M. A. Rahman, and N. Abdullah, “Therapeutic potential of mushrooms in preventing and ameliorating hypertension,” Trends in Food Science and Technology, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 104–115, 2014.

D. D. De Silva, S. Rapior, F. Fons, A. H. Bahkali, and K. D. Hyde, “Medicinal mushrooms in supportive cancer therapies: an approach to anti-cancer effects and putative mechanisms of action,” Fungal Diversity, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 1–35, 2012.

P. Hyde, A. Aguzzi, and L. Pizzoferrato, “Nutritional value of mushrooms widely consumed in Italy,” Food Chemistry, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 321–325, 2001.

L. Junior, O. Valadao, and A. M. Inacio, “Use of glucosamine and chondroitin to treat osteoarthritis: a review of the literature,” Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition), vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 300–306, 2013.

A. B. Sitanggang, H.-S. Wu, S. S. Wang, and Y.-C. Ho, “Effect of pellet size and stimulating factor on the glucosamine production using Aspergillus sp. BCRC 31742,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 101, no. 10, pp. 3595–3601, 2010.

H. Sashiwa, S. Fujishima, N. Yamano et al., “Production of N-acetyl-d-glucosamine from α-chitin by crude enzymes from Aeromonas hydrophila H-2330,” Carbohydrate Research, vol. 337, no. 8, pp. 761–763, 2002.

L. J. Appel, E. D. Frohlich, J. E. Hall et al., “The importance of population-wide sodium reduction as a means to prevent cardiovascular disease and stroke,” Circulation, vol. 123, no. 10, pp. 1138–1143, 2011.

S. Helle, N. M. Bennett, K. Lau, J. H. Matsui, and S. J. B. Duff, “A kinetic model for production of glucose by hydrolysis of levoglucosan and cellobiosan from pyrolysis oil,” Carbohydrate Research, vol. 342, no. 16, pp. 2365–2370, 2007.

M. D. N. Meinita, Y.-K. Hong, and G.-T. Jeong, “Comparison of sulfuric and hydrochloric acids as catalysts in hydrolysis of Kappaphycus alvarezii (cottonii),” Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, vol. 35, no. 1-2, pp. 123–128, 2012.

R. Suxia, X. Haiyan, Z. Jinling, L. Shunqing, H. Xiaofeng, and L. Tingzhou, “Furfural production from rice husk using sulfuric acid and a solid acid catalyst through a two-stage process,” Carbohydrate Research, vol. 359, pp. 1–6, 2012.

Z. Pin, R. Sittiruk, and S. Manote, “Production and purification of glucosamine and angiotensin-I converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitory peptides from mushroom hydrolysates,” Journal of Functional Foods, vol. 36, pp. 72–83, 2017.

N. Gandhi and J. K. Laidler, “Preparation of glucosamine hydrochloride,” U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC, USA, 2002, US Patent No. 6486307 B1.

J. Z. Zhou, T. Waszkuc, and F. Mohammed, “Single laboratory validation of a method for determination of glucosamine in raw materials and dietary supplements containing glucosamine sulfate and/or glucosamine hydrochloride by high-performance liquid chromatography with FMOC-su derivatization,” Journal of AOAC International, vol. 87, pp. 1083–1092, 2004.

J. Z. Zhou, T. Waszkuc, and F. Mohammed, “Determination of glucosamine in raw materials and dietary supplements containing glucosamine sulfate and/or glucosamine hydrochloride by high-performance liquid chromatography with FMOC-Su derivatization, collaborative study,” Journal of AOAC International, vol. 88, p. 1048, 2005.

J. H. Espenson, Chemical Kinetics and Reaction Mechanisms, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 2002.

K. J. Laidler, Chemical Kinetics, Maitrey Printech Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi, India, 3rd edition, 1987.

J. I. Steinfeld, J. S. Francisco, and W. L. Hase, Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2nd edition, 1999.

B. P. Lavarack, G. J. Griffin, and D. Rodman, “The acid hydrolysis of sugarcane bagasse hemicellulose to produce xylose, arabinose, glucose and other products,” Biomass and Bioenergy, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 367–380, 2002.

T. Yoshioka, T. Motoki, and A. Okuwaki, “Kinetics of hydrolysis of poly (ethylene terephthalate) powder in sulfuric acid by a modified shrinking-core model,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 75–79, 2001.

A. Herrera, S. J. Téllez-Luis, J. J. González-Cabriales, J. A. Ramı́rez, and M. Vázquez, “Effect of the hydrochloric acid concentration on the hydrolysis of sorghum straw at atmospheric pressure,” Journal of Food Engineering, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 103–109, 2004.

D. A. S. Ravens, “The chemical reactivity of poly (ethylene terephthalate): heterogeneous hvdrolysis by hydrochloric acid,” Polymer, vol. 1, pp. 375–383, 1960.

L. Han, Y. Sapozhnikova, and S. J. Lehotay, “Streamlined sample cleanup using combined dispersive solid-phase extraction and in-vial filtration for analysis of pesticides and environmental pollutants in shrimp,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 827, pp. 40–46, 2014.

T. Sarkar, M. M. Alam, N. Parvin et al., “Assessment of heavy metals contamination and human health risk in shrimp collected from different farms and rivers at Khulna-Satkhira region, Bangladesh,” Toxicology Reports, vol. 3, pp. 346–350, 2016.

E. G. Hala, S. T. Abdelrahman, V. D. Natalia, M. S. H. Ahmed, and M. A. Nahed, “Characterization of chitosan extracted from different Crustacean shell wastes,” Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 16, pp. 454–461, 2016.

R. Aguilar, J. A. Ramı́rez, G. Garrote, and M. Vázquez, “Kinetic study of the acid hydrolysis of sugar cane bagasse,” Journal of Food Engineering, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 309–318, 2002.

X. Yan and H. M. Evenocheck, “Chitosan analysis using acid hydrolysis and HPLC/UV,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 1774–1778, 2012.

K. Vårum, M. Ottøy, and O. Smidsrød, “Acid hydrolysis of chitosans,” Carbohydrate Polymers, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 89–98, 2001.

T. N. Ivshina, S. D. Artamonova, V. P. Ivshin, and F. F. Sharnina, “Isolation of the chitin-glucan complex from the fruiting bodies of mycothallus,” Applied Biochemistry and Microbiology, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 313–318, 2009.