Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Increasing cellulose accessibility is more important than removing lignin: A comparison of cellulose solvent‐based lignocellulose fractionation and soaking in aqueous ammonia

Rollin, Joseph A., Zhu, Zhiguang, Sathitsuksanoh, Noppadon, Zhang, Y.‐H. Percival·2011·Biotechnology and Bioengineering

Abstract

While many pretreatments attempt to improve the enzymatic digestibility of biomass by removing lignin, this study shows that improving the surface area accessible to cellulase is a more important factor for achieving a high sugar yield. Here we compared the pretreatment of switchgrass by two methods, cellulose solvent‐ and organic solvent‐based lignocellulose fractionation (COSLIF) and soaking in aqueous ammonia (SAA). Following pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis was conducted at two cellulase loadings, 15 filter paper units (FPU)/g glucan and 3 FPU/g glucan, with and without BSA blocking of lignin absorption sites. The hydrolysis results showed that the lignin remaining after SAA had a significant negative effect on cellulase performance, despite the high level of delignification achieved with this pretreatment. No negative effect due to lignin was detected for COSLIF‐treated substrate. SEM micrographs, XRD crystallinity measurements, and cellulose accessibility to cellulase (CAC) determinations confirmed that COSLIF fully disrupted the cell wall structure, resulting in a 16‐fold increase in CAC, while SAA caused a 1.4‐fold CAC increase. A surface plot relating the lignin removal, CAC, and digestibility of numerous samples (both pure cellulosic substrates and lignocellulosic materials pretreated by several methods) was also developed to better understand the relative impacts of delignification and CAC on glucan digestibility. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2011; 108:22–30. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.22919

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Rollin, J. A., Zhu, Z., Sathitsuksanoh, N., & Zhang, Y. ‐. P.
Venue
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-09-30
Volume
108
Issue
1
Pages
22-30
ISSN
  • 0006-3592 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0290
OpenAlex
W2101393819
Cited by
344
References
47
FWCI
16.57
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

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.