MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976565719 · doi:10.1002/biot.201400194

Using <i>Populus</i> as a lignocellulosic feedstock for bioethanol

2015· review· en· W1976565719 on OpenAlexaff
Ilga Porth, Yousry A. El‐Kassaby

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Journal · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiorefineryBiofuelRaw materialBioenergyBiomass (ecology)Energy cropBioconversionLignocellulosic biomassEnvironmental scienceBiotechnologyShort rotation coppicePulp and paper industryBiochemical engineeringAgroforestryAgronomyBiologyEngineeringFermentationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populus species along with species from the sister genus Salix will provide valuable feedstock resources for advanced second-generation biofuels. Their inherent fast growth characteristics can particularly be exploited for short rotation management, a time and energy saving cultivation alternative for lignocellulosic feedstock supply. Salicaceae possess inherent cell wall characteristics with favorable cellulose to lignin ratios for utilization as bioethanol crop. We review economically important traits relevant for intensively managed biofuel crop plantations, genomic and phenotypic resources available for Populus, breeding strategies for forest trees dedicated to bioenergy provision, and bioprocesses and downstream applications related to opportunities using Salicaceae as a renewable resource. Challenges need to be resolved for every single step of the conversion process chain, i.e., starting from tree domestication for improved performance as a bioenergy crop, bioconversion process, policy development for land use changes associated with advanced biofuels, and harvest and supply logistics associated with industrial-scale biorefinery plants using Populus as feedstock. Significant hurdles towards cost and energy efficiency, environmental friendliness, and yield maximization with regards to biomass pretreatment, saccharification, and fermentation of celluloses and the sustainability of biorefineries as a whole still need to be overcome.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology JournalSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207