What Are the Major Components in Steam Pretreated Lignocellulosic Biomass That Inhibit the Efficacy of Cellulase Enzyme Mixtures?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Any pretreat process used on lignocellulosic substrates, such as steam pretreatment, although opening up and enhancing access to the cellulose, will typically generate inhibitory compounds (i.e., soluble mono/oligomeric sugars, phenolics, furans, extractives, etc.) that limit or restrict the efficiency of enzyme mediated cellulose hydrolysis. In the work reported here, the major groups of inhibitors derived from various, “real-life” steam pretreated lignocellulosic biomass were identified and their inhibitory effects on the rate and extent of enzymatic hydrolysis were assessed. It was apparent that monomeric sugars and phenolics inhibited the hydrolytic potential of the cellulases most severely, with sugar accounting for the majority of the decrease. The inhibitory effect of the monomeric sugars was consistent and concentration (but not composition) dependent throughout the time course of hydrolysis. In contrast, the influence of the phenolics was substrate dependent and more harmful at the later stage of hydrolysis. Surprisingly, the oligomeric sugars derived after steam pretreatment of woody biomass showed little influence on the hydrolytic potential of cellulase enzymes.
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".