Wheat straw‐derived bio‐based hydroponic polyurethane foams for plant growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Agricultural waste is a renewable and sustainable resource that can be used as an alternative to petroleum for the production of chemicals and materials. In this study, liquefied wheat straw was used as bio‐polyols to prepare bio‐based hydroponic polyurethane (BHPU) foams. The effects of foam preparation variables, such as surfactants, catalysts, blowing agents and types of petroleum‐based polyols (PPG 400 and/or VORANOL 280) on the properties of BHPU foam were investigated through single‐factor experiments. Response surface methodology was applied to optimize the foam formula. The prepared BHPU foams with 40–50% (w/w) bio‐polyols had an open cell content of 70–96%, a water absorption capacity of 594–1085% (w/w) and a water absorption time of 6–140 s. The potential of using the prepared BHPU foam as a plant growing medium was evaluated via mechanical testing, cell morphology, thermal stability, UV weathering testing and Phaseolus vulgaris (Linn.) cultivar Prelude and Glycine max (Linn.) Merr. seed germination tests. The wheat straw‐derived BHPU foams demonstrated potential as a plant growth medium in horticulture. © 2022 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".