Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Potential inhibitors from wet oxidation of wheat straw and their effect on ethanol production of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Wet oxidation and fermentation by yeast

Klinke, H. B., Olsson, L., Thomsen, A. B., Ahring, B. K.·2003·Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Abstract

Alkaline wet oxidation (WO) (using water, 6.5 g/L sodium carbonate and 12 bar oxygen at 195°C) was used as pretreatment method for wheat straw (60 g/L), resulting in a hydrolysate and a cellulosic solid fraction. The hydrolysate consisted of soluble hemicellulose (8 g/L), low‐molecular‐weight carboxylic acids (3.9 g/L), phenols (0.27 g/L = 1.7 m M) and 2‐furoic acid (0.007 g/L). The wet oxidized wheat straw hydrolysate caused no inhibition of ethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae ATCC 96581. Nine phenols and 2‐furoic acid, identified to be present in the hydrolysate, were each tested in concentrations of 50–100 times the concentration found in the hydrolysate for their effect on fermentation by yeast. At these high concentrations (10 m M), 4‐hydroxybenzaldehyde, vanillin, 4‐hydroxyacetophenone and acetovanillone caused a 53–67% decrease in the volumetric ethanol productivity in S. cerevisiae compared to controls with an ethanol productivity of 3.8 g/L. The phenol acids (4‐hydroxy, vanillic and syringic acid), 2‐furoic acid, syringaldehyde and acetosyringone were less inhibitory, causing a 5–16% decrease in ethanol productivity. By adding the same aromatic compounds to hydrolysate (10 m M), it was shown that syringaldehyde and acetovanillone interacted negatively with hydrolysate components on the ethanol productivity. Fermentation in WO hydrolysate, that had been concentrated 6 times by freeze‐drying, lasted 4 hours longer than in regular hydrolysate; however, the ethanol yield was the same. The longer fermentation time could not be explained by an inhibitory action of phenols alone, but was more likely caused by inhibitory interactions of phenols with carboxylic acids, such as acetic and formic acid. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Biotechnol Bioeng 81: 738–747, 2003.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bit.10523

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Klinke, H. B., Olsson, L., Thomsen, A. B., & Ahring, B. K.
Venue
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-01-14
Volume
81
Issue
6
Pages
738-747
ISSN
  • 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0290
OpenAlex
W2139350233
Cited by
183
References
0
FWCI
2.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Potential inhibitors from wet oxidation of wheat straw and their effect on ethanol production of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Wet oxidation and fermentation by yeast. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bit.10523
The paper
Klinke, H. B., Olsson, L., Thomsen, A. B., & Ahring, B. K. (2003). Potential inhibitors from wet oxidation of wheat straw and their effect on ethanol production of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: Wet oxidation and fermentation by yeast. Biotechnology and Bioengineering. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.10523

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.