Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32866174›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

How much water can wood cell walls hold? A triangulation approach to determine the maximum cell wall moisture content.

Emil Engelund Thybring, Ramūnas Digaitis, Thomas Nord-Larsen, Greeley Beck, Maria Fredriksson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Emil Engelund ThybringDepartment of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Biomass Science and Technology, Forest Nature and Biomass, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0471-6922
Ramūnas DigaitisDepartment of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Biomass Science and Technology, Forest Nature and Biomass, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Thomas Nord-LarsenDepartment of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, Forest Resource Assessment and Bioenergy, Forest Nature and Biomass, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Greeley BeckDepartment of Wood Technology, Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research, Ås, Norway.
Maria FredrikssonDivision of Building Materials, Department of Building and Environmental Technology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-6500-9706
University of Copenhagen · DKLund University · SENorwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wood is a porous, hygroscopic material with engineering properties that depend significantly on the amount of water (moisture) in the material. Water in wood can be present in both cell walls and the porous void-structure of the material, but it is only water in cell walls that affects the engineering properties. An important characteristic of wood is therefore the capacity for water of its solid cell walls, i.e. the maximum cell wall moisture content. However, this quantity is not straight-forward to determine experimentally, and the measured value may depend on the experimental technique used. In this study, we used a triangulation approach to determine the maximum cell wall moisture content by using three experimental techniques based on different measurement principles: low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (LFNMR) relaxometry, differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and the solute exclusion technique (SET). The LFNMR data were furthermore analysed by two varieties of exponential decay analysis. These techniques were used to determine the maximum cell wall moisture contents of nine different wood species, covering a wide range of densities. The results from statistical analysis showed that LFNMR yielded lower cell wall moisture contents than DSC and SET, which were fairly similar. Both of the latter methods include factors that could either under-estimate or over-estimate the measured cell wall moisture content. Because of this and the fact that the DSC and SET methods are based on different measurement principles, it is likely that they provide realistic values of the cell wall moisture content in the water-saturated state.

Indexed as

Cell WallPorosityWaterWoodWater

Identifiers

PMID32866174
PMCPMC7458317
OpenAlexW3082734412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.