Comparative analysis of the structure of water-soluble LCCs and the Björkman LCCs in poplar wood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structural study of lignin-carbohydrate complexes (LCCs) provides a theoretical basis for the high-value utilization of biomass which has always been a hot topic in biomaterials and biomass refining. This paper compares the structure of two types of LCCs in poplar. After poplar wood was crushed by ball milling, water-soluble LCCs and the Björkman LCCs were extracted by hot water extraction and the Björkman classical method, respectively. The molecular weight was determined by GPC, the composition was determined by chemical analysis, and the structure was studied by UV, IR and 2D-NMR. Comparing the two, the results showed that water-soluble LCCs contains a higher content of carbohydrates and has a relatively wide molecular weight distribution, while the carbohydrate content of the Björkman LCCs was relatively low, and the molecular weight distribution range was relatively narrow. UV, IR and 2D-NMR results confirmed that the main chemical links between the lignin units of the two LCCs were β-O-4. β-β, β-5 structures. The chemical linkages between lignin and carbohydrates in water-soluble LCCs were mainly phenyl glycosidic bonds and ester bonds, while in the Björkman LCCs, there were not only have phenyl glycosides bonds and ester bonds, but also found existence of ether bonds between lignin and carbohydrates. This work contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the structure of poplar LCCs and provides theoretical support for the further application of poplar wood.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".