The interaction of carbohydrate-binding modules with insoluble non-crystalline cellulose is enthalpically driven
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural cellulose exists as a composite of cellulose forms, which can be broadly characterized as crystalline or non-crystalline. The recognition of both of these forms of cellulose by the CBMs (carbohydrate-binding modules) of microbial glycoside hydrolases is important for the efficient natural and biotechnological conversion of cellulosic biomass. The category of CBM that binds insoluble non-crystalline cellulose does so with an affinity approx. 10-20-fold greater than their affinity for cello-oligosaccharides and/or soluble polysaccharides. This phenomenon has been assumed to originate from the effects of changes in configurational entropy upon binding. The loss of configurational entropy is thought to be less profound upon binding to conformationally restrained insoluble non-crystalline cellulose, resulting in larger free energies of binding. However, using isothermal titration calorimetry, it is shown that this is not the case for the high-affinity interactions of CcCBM17 (the family 17 CBM from EngF of Clostridium cellulovorans) and BspCBM28 (the family 28 CBM from Cel5A of Bacillus species 1139) with regenerated cellulose, an insoluble preparation of primarily non-crystalline cellulose. The enhanced free energy of binding of non-crystalline cellulose relative to cello-oligosaccharides is by virtue of improved enthalpy, not entropy.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".