Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30228792›Full record

ReviewFood technology and biotechnology2018

Review of Second Generation Bioethanol Production from Residual Biomass.

Katarzyna Robak, Maria Balcerek

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Food technology and biotechnology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed
27.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 621 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Structural genome variation drives adaptation of the xylose-fermenting yeast Scheffersomyces stipitis to lignocellulosic hydrolysates.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katarzyna RobakLodz University of Technology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences, Institute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Department of Spirit and Yeast Technology, Wolczanska 171/173, PL 90-924 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8765-0035
Maria BalcerekLodz University of Technology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences, Institute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Department of Spirit and Yeast Technology, Wolczanska 171/173, PL 90-924 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3731-868
Lodz University of Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the context of climate change and the depletion of fossil fuels, there is a great need for alternatives to petroleum in the transport sector. This review provides an overview of the production of second generation bioethanol, which is distinguished from the first generation and subsequent generations of biofuels by its use of lignocellulosic biomass as raw material. The structural components of the lignocellulosic biomass such as cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin, are presented along with technological unit steps including pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis, fermentation, distillation and dehydration. The purpose of the pretreatment step is to increase the surface area of carbohydrate available for enzymatic saccharification, while minimizing the content of inhibitors. Performing the enzymatic hydrolysis releases fermentable sugars, which are converted by microbial catalysts into ethanol. The hydrolysates obtained after the pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis contain a wide spectrum of sugars, predominantly glucose and xylose. Genetically engineered microorganisms are therefore needed to carry out co-fermentation. The excess of harmful inhibitors in the hydrolysate, such as weak organic acids, furan derivatives and phenol components, can be removed by detoxification before fermentation. Effective saccharification further requires using exogenous hemicellulases and cellulolytic enzymes. Conventional species of distiller's yeast are unable to ferment pentoses into ethanol, and only a very few natural microorganisms, including yeast species like

Indexed as

biofuelbiomass pretreatmentco-fermentationenzymatic hydrolysislignocellulosic biomasssecond generation bioethanol

Identifiers

PMID30228792
PMCPMC6117988
OpenAlexW2782873761

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.