Evaluating the Distribution of Cellulases and the Recycling of Free Cellulases during the Hydrolysis of Lignocellulosic Substrates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recycling of cellulase enzymes is one potential strategy for reducing the cost of the enzymatic hydrolysis step during the bioconversion of lignocellulosics to ethanol. To determine the influence of lignin on the post-hydrolysis distribution of cellulase enzymes between the liquid and solid phases, the hydrolysis of Avicel was compared to an organosolv-pretreated Douglas fir substrate with a lignin content of 3.0%. After a 12 h hydrolysis reaction on Avicel, 90% of the added cellulases (including beta-glucosidases) remained "free" in the liquid phase compared to only 65% in the case of the hydrolysis of the organosolv-pretreated Douglas fir substrate. The readsorption of free cellulases by supplementing the hydrolysis reaction with fresh substrate was explored as a potential means of recovering the free cellulases that remain in the liquid phase after hydrolysis. The Langmuir adsorption isotherm was used to develop a model predicting that 82% of the free cellulases could be recovered via readsorption onto fresh substrates during the hydrolysis of an ethanol-pretreated mixed softwood substrate with a lignin content of 6%. Recoverable free cellulase values of 85% and 88% based on cellulase activity and protein content, respectively, were obtained after experimental verification of the model. The readsorption of free cellulases onto fresh lignocellulosic substrates was shown to be an effective method for free enzyme recovery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it