Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35789853›Full record

ReviewiScience2022

Mechanical pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass toward enzymatic/fermentative valorization.

Carlos Arce, Lukas Kratky

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. ModifiedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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.

Carlos ArceCzech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technická 4, Dejvice, 160 00 Prague 6, Czech Republic.
Lukas KratkyCzech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technická 4, Dejvice, 160 00 Prague 6, Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lignocellulosic biomass (LCB) has the potential to replace fossil fuels, thanks to the concept of biorefinery. This material is formed mainly by cellulose, lignin, and hemicellulose. To maximize the valorization potential of this material, LCB needs to be pretreated. Milling is always performed before any other treatments. It does not produce chemical change and improves the efficiency of the upcoming processes. Additionally, it makes LCB easier to handle and increases bulk density and transfer phenomena of the next pretreatment step. However, this treatment is energy consuming, so it needs to be optimized. Several mills can be used, and the equipment selection depends on the characteristics of the material, the final size required, and the operational regime: continuous or batch. Among them, ball, knife, and hammer mills are the most used at the laboratory scale, especially before enzymatic or fermentative treatments. The continuous operational regime (knife and hammer mill) allows us to work with high volumes of raw material and can continuously reduce particle size, unlike the batch operating regime (ball mill). This review recollects the information about the application of these machines, the effect on particle size, and subsequent treatments. On the one hand, ball milling reduced particle size the most; on the other hand, hammer and knife milling consumed less energy. Furthermore, the latter reached a small final particle size (units of millimeters) suitable for valorization.

Indexed as

BiomassBiotechnologyChemical EngineeringEngineering

Identifiers

PMID35789853
PMCPMC9250023

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.