MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292313633 · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c02966

Extraction of Chitin from Green Crab Shells by Mechanochemistry and Aging

2022· article· en· W4292313633 on OpenAlexafffund
Faezeh Hajiali, Juliana L. Vidal, Tony Jin, Luis Carlos de la Garza, Madison Santos, Galen Yang, Audrey Moores

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre in Green Chemistry and Catalysis
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanada Foundation for InnovationParks CanadaMcGill UniversityCentre in Green Chemistry and CatalysisMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response NetworkAmerican Chemical Society
KeywordsChitinExtraction (chemistry)MechanochemistryChemistryCitric acidChemical engineeringPulp and paper industryFood scienceOrganic chemistryChitosan

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crustacean shell waste is one of the most important chitin sources for commercial use due to its low price and high availability. The extraction of chitin from this residue relies on two removal steps: one for proteins and another one for minerals. Herein, we report a “solvent-free”, one-pot process relying on mechanochemistry and aging to convert crustacean shells into chitin with high yields and low ash content. The extraction was performed on European Green Crabs, one of the world’s most damaging invasive species, thus converting a serious environmental threat into a biomaterial opportunity. Successful chitin isolation of Green Crabs was achieved by milling of solid acids (i.e., citric, ascorbic, malic, succinic, and salicylic acid) for 10 to 30 min, while a combination of milling and aging was necessary for aqueous acids (i.e., hydrochloric and acetic acid). Milling, aging times, and shell to acid ratios were optimized, while the process could be scaled to 200 g of shell starting materials. This method required limited chemical and energy inputs, which were quantified by sustainability metrics. The process reported is a more sustainable approach for chitin production over the current industrial methods and has the potential to be extended to other chitin sources (e.g., lobster, shrimp, and insects).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations49
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Sustainable Chemistry & EngineeringSame topicNanocomposite Films for Food PackagingFrench-language works237,207