Storage mode and pressing delay effects on juice extraction and sugar content of the biomass of sweet pearl millet and sweet sorghum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<abstract> <bold>Abstract.</bold> Sweet pearl millet and sweet sorghum have a good potential for bioethanol production as their stalks contain juice with high sugar content. However, the sugar content could be altered by fermentation if the biomass is not pressed soon after being harvested. Trials using the biomass of sweet pearl millet and sweet sorghum were carried out in summer 2013 at the Saint-Augustin-de-Desmaures research station of Université Laval, Quebec, Canada. These trials consisted of extracting the juice from the biomass of both crops. A first juice extraction took place after harvesting the biomass, using a specific hydraulic press designed and built at the Department of Soils and Agri-Food Engineering of Université Laval. Three additional juice extractions were made 24, 48, and 72 hours after the first one. Two storage modes were considered: whole stalk or chopped biomass. For the chopped biomass, obtained results showed a decrease of sugar content with increasing the time delay before pressing, for both crops. Juice extraction was more efficient when the biomass was chopped. However, sugars are best conserved if the biomass is stored as whole stalk. If stored for 24h as whole stalk, 103.5 g kg<sup>- 1</sup> dry matter (DM) was extracted from sweet sorghum biomass against only 66.1 g kg<sup>-1</sup> DM for sweet pearl millet. If the biomass is chopped when harvested, it is recommended to extract the juice from the biomass as soon as possible. However, if possible, the harvested biomass should be kept as whole stalk rather than chopped until proceeding to its pressing.
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".