Printing of Polymer Microcapsules for Enzyme Immobilization on Paper Substrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI) microcapsules containing laccase from Trametes hirsuta (ThL) and Trametes versicolor (TvL) were printed onto paper substrate by three different methods: screen printing, rod coating, and flexo printing. Microcapsules were fabricated via interfacial polycondensation of PEI with the cross-linker sebacoyl chloride, incorporated into an ink, and printed or coated on the paper substrate. The same ink components were used for three printing methods, and it was found that laccase microcapsules were compatible with the ink. Enzymatic activity of microencapsulated TvL was maintained constant in polymer-based ink for at least eight weeks. Thick layers with high enzymatic activity were obtained when laccase-containing microcapsules were screen printed on paper substrate. Flexo printed bioactive paper showed very low activity, since by using this printing method the paper surface was not fully covered by enzyme microcapsules. Finally, screen printing provided a bioactive paper with high water-resistance and the highest enzyme lifetime.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".