MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enzymatic hydrolysis of corn crop residues with high solid loadings: New insights into the impact of bioextrusion on biomass deconstruction using carbohydrate-binding modules

2019· article· en· W2921882365 on OpenAlexaff
Etienne Gatt, Vinay Khatri, Julien Bley, Simon Barnabé, Virginie Vandenbossche, Marc Beauregard

Bibliographic record

VenueBioresource Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité LavalPROTEOUniversity of Alberta
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeInstitut National Polytechnique de ToulouseMinistère de l'Education Nationale, de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche
KeywordsCelluloseBiomass (ecology)ChemistryCellulaseLignocellulosic biomassEnzymatic hydrolysisHydrolysisPulp and paper industryStrawFood scienceAgronomyOrganic chemistryBiologyInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lignocellulosic biomass is a sustainable source of renewable substrate to produce low carbon footprint energy and materials. Biomass conversion is usually performed in two steps: a biomass pretreatment for improving cellulose accessibility followed by enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulose. In this study we investigated the efficiency of a bioextrusion pretreatment (extrusion in the presence of cellulase enzyme) for production of reducing sugars from corn crop agricultural residues. Our results demonstrate that bioextrusion increased the reducing sugar conversion yield by at least 94% at high solid/liquid ratio (14%-40%). Monitoring biomass surface with carbohydrate-binding modules (FTCM-depletion assay) revealed that well known negative impact of high solid/liquid ratio on conversion yield is not due to the lack of exposed cellulose which was abundant under such conditions. Bioextrusion was found to be less efficient on alkaline pretreated biomass but being a mild and solvent limiting pretreatment, it might help to minimize the waste stream.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBioresource TechnologySame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207