Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative sugar recovery and fermentation data following pretreatment of poplar wood by leading technologies

Open access
Wyman, Charles E., Dale, Bruce E., Elander, Richard T., Holtzapple, Mark, Ladisch, Michael R., Lee, Y. Y., Mitchinson, Colin, Saddler, John N.·2009·Biotechnology Progress

Abstract

Through a Biomass Refining Consortium for Applied Fundamentals and Innovation among Auburn University, Dartmouth College, Michigan State University, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Purdue University, Texas A&M University, the University of British Columbia, and the University of California at Riverside, leading pretreatment technologies based on ammonia fiber expansion, aqueous ammonia recycle, dilute sulfuric acid, lime, neutral pH, and sulfur dioxide were applied to a single source of poplar wood, and the remaining solids from each technology were hydrolyzed to sugars using the same enzymes. Identical analytical methods and a consistent material balance methodology were employed to develop comparative performance data for each combination of pretreatment and enzymes. Overall, compared to data with corn stover employed previously, the results showed that poplar was more recalcitrant to conversion to sugars and that sugar yields from the combined operations of pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis varied more among pretreatments. However, application of more severe pretreatment conditions gave good yields from sulfur dioxide and lime, and a recombinant yeast strain fermented the mixed stream of glucose and xylose sugars released by enzymatic hydrolysis of water washed solids from all pretreatments to ethanol with similarly high yields. An Agricultural and Industrial Advisory Board followed progress and helped steer the research to meet scientific and commercial needs. © 2009 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Biotechnol. Prog., 2009

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/btpr.142

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Wyman, C. E., Dale, B. E., Elander, R. T., Holtzapple, M., Ladisch, M. R., Lee, Y. Y., Mitchinson, C., & Saddler, J. N.
Venue
Biotechnology Progress
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-03
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
333-339
ISSN
  • 1520-6033 (ISSN-L)
  • 8756-7938
OpenAlex
W2067797967
Cited by
299
References
1
FWCI
19.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Comparative sugar recovery and fermentation data following pretreatment of poplar wood by leading technologies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/btpr.142
The paper
Wyman, C. E., Dale, B. E., Elander, R. T., Holtzapple, M., Ladisch, M. R., Lee, Y. Y., Mitchinson, C., & Saddler, J. N. (2009). Comparative sugar recovery and fermentation data following pretreatment of poplar wood by leading technologies. Biotechnology Progress. https://doi.org/10.1002/btpr.142

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.