Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Investigating plant cell wall components that affect biomass recalcitrance in poplar and switchgrass

DeMartini, Jaclyn D., Pattathil, Sivakumar, Miller, Jeffrey S., Li, Hongjia, Hahn, Michael G., Wyman, Charles E.·2013·Energy & Environmental Science

Abstract

One of the key barriers to low cost biological conversion of cellulosic biomass into renewable fuels and chemicals is the recalcitrance of plants to deconstruction by chemical, enzymatic, and/or microbial routes. A deeper understanding of the source of biomass recalcitrance is sorely needed so that specific cell wall chemical and structural features that limit the release of sugars can be identified in different plants. In this study, biomass from two phylogenetically different plants, the monocot switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and the woody dicot poplar (Populus trichocarpa) were studied. Sets of samples that varied in composition and structure were generated from each native biomass via defined chemical and enzymatic extractions. The two native biomasses, as well as their extracted residues, were characterized, and the enzymatic digestibility of all samples was tested to shed light on substrate-related features that limit sugar release. Based on the results from this study, lignin and hemicellulose were found to influence the enzymatic digestibility of both poplar and switchgrass, but the degree of influence varied significantly. Xylan removal from switchgrass resulted in materials that achieved nearly 100% glucose yields at high enzyme loading in subsequent enzymatic hydrolysis, whereas chlorite extractions that reduced the lignin content had the most beneficial effect in poplar. While lignin content likely plays an important role in biomass recalcitrance particularly in plants such as poplar that contain higher levels of lignin, this work identified subsets of hemicellulose that were key recalcitrance-causing factors in switchgrass. The findings and research approach presented in this study strongly suggest that different strategies will need to be adopted when trying to engineer poplar and switchgrass for reduced recalcitrance or when designing processing conditions to efficiently convert a specific biomass feedstock into sugars.

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 · 10.1039/c3ee23801f

Cites

38 of 38 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

Show all 38 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
DeMartini, J. D., Pattathil, S., Miller, J. S., Li, H., Hahn, M. G., & Wyman, C. E.
Venue
Energy & Environmental Science
Published
2013
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
898
ISSN
  • 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
  • 1754-5706
OpenAlex
W2151280270
Cited by
264
References
38
FWCI
14.53
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: Investigating plant cell wall components that affect biomass recalcitrance in poplar and switchgrass. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c3ee23801f
The paper
DeMartini, J. D., Pattathil, S., Miller, J. S., Li, H., Hahn, M. G., & Wyman, C. E. (2013). Investigating plant cell wall components that affect biomass recalcitrance in poplar and switchgrass. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ee23801f

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.