MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075835833 · doi:10.1021/ie061576l

Pretreatment of Lodgepole Pine Killed by Mountain Pine Beetle Using the Ethanol Organosolv Process:  Fractionation and Process Optimization

2007· article· en· W2075835833 on OpenAlexafffund
Xuejun Pan, Dan Xie, Richard W. Yu, Dexter Lam, J. N. Saddler

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOrganosolvCelluloseChemistryPinus contortaCellulaseLigninXyloseFormic acidHemicelluloseChromatographyEthanolBotanyFood scienceBiochemistryFermentationOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lodgepole pine ( Pinus contorta ) killed by mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae ) (MPB-LPP) was evaluated for bioconversion to ethanol using the ethanol organosolv process. The pretreatment was optimized using an experimental matrix designed with response surface methodology. It was found that MPB-LPP was easy to pretreat and delignify, but gave low yields of substrate and carbohydrate as a result of excessive hydrolysis and subsequent decomposition of cellulose and hemicellulose during the pretreatment. The center-point conditions (170 °C, 60 min, 1.1% H 2 SO 4 and 65% ethanol) were close to the optimum for the recovery of glucose and ethanol organosolv lignin. At the center-point conditions, ∼75% of the cellulose present in the untreated wood was recovered in the substrate fraction, and approximately 79% of the lignin in the wood was recovered as ethanol organosolv lignin (EOL). The combined recovery of carbohydrate in the substrate and water-soluble fractions was ∼83% glucose, ∼46% mannose, ∼53% xylose, ∼78% galactose, and ∼55% arabinose. The lost carbohydrate was decomposed to furfural, hydroxymethylfurfural, and levulinic and formic acids. The substrate generated at center-point conditions from MPB-LPP was readily digestible. Cellulose-to-glucose conversion yields of ∼93% and ∼97% were achieved within 24 and 48 h, respectively, with 20 FPU of cellulase/g of cellulose.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations208
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207