Use of the Simons' Staining Technique to Assess Cellulose Accessibility in Pretreated Substrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The specificity of the Simons' staining technique for determining the specific surface area (SSA) of cellulose—the amount of cellulose in a pretreated substrate that is accessible to cellulases—was assessed over a range of cellulosic substrates. Both the Direct Blue (DB) dye and the high molecular weight (HMW) fraction (>100 kda) of the Direct Orange (DO) dye were shown to bind with high specificity to the cellulose rather than hemicellulose and/or lignin. The use of the DO dye by itself could also indicate differences in the accessibility/SSA of various types of cellulose resulting in an R 2 value of 0.87 when plotted against enzymatic hydrolysis yields. The previously reported fluctuations in the ratio of DO:DB when the dyes were adsorbed to similar cellulosic substrates were shown to be primarily due to differences in the method used for the isolation of the high molecular weight fraction of the DO dye. A procedure for the enrichment of the >100 kDa HMW fraction of the DO using a minimum of two rounds of ultrafiltration is described. The ability of the modified assays to assess the specific surface area of pretreated and enzymatically hydrolyzed substrates showed good reproducibility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".