Aqueous/Steam-Fractionated Agricultural Residues as Substrates for Ethanol Production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was aimed at evaluating two agricultural residues, corn stalks and barley straw, as substrates for ethanol production, after aqueous/steam fractionation at a fixed level of process pretreatment severity ( T = 220 °C, t = 120 s). Two fractions were used as carbon sources for ethanol production: (i) a hemicellulose-rich liquor and (ii) cellulosic fines recovered at 4−9% lignin content after a delignification step. Both fractions were enzyme hydrolyzed. The hemicellulose fraction was easily converted into fermentable sugars at 90% of theoretical yield. The extent of saccharification for the cellulosic fines was about 60%. Increasing the delignification by adding 1% v/v hydrogen peroxide resulted in up to 80% saccharification. The hydrolyzate from the cellulosic fines was easily fermented to ethanol at 90% of theoretical yield with Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Pachysolen tannophilus ATCC 32691, whereas the hydrolyzate from hemicellulose-rich liquors was fermented only to 20% of theoretical yield. A lime treatment of the hemicellulosic-rich liquors slightly improved cell growth and ethanol production.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".