DOCSLIB.ORG

National Program 213 BIOREFINING & National Program 306 QUALITY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
National Program 213 BIOREFINING & National Program 306 QUALITY National Program 213 BIOREFINING United States & Department of Agriculture National Program 306 Research, QUALITY AND UTILIZATION Education, and Economics OF AGRICULTURAL Agricultural PRODUCTS Research Service CCOMPLISHMENT EPORTS Office of A R National Programs 2013-2017 September 2018 Captions for cover photos: 1. The first automated egg grading system developed by ARS at the request of the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service uses LED light and computerized software. 2. ARS researchers demonstrated that Napier grass grown in Georgia for ethanol conversion is twice as productive per acre as corn harvested from the Midwest. 3. ARS worked with the Cooper Tire Company on research that led to the development of a guayule rubber passenger car tire, providing the first U.S. source of domestic rubber. 4. ARS led extensive work on sampling dust emissions from cotton gins; regulators used their findings to establish data-based limits on particulate emissions, which benefited cotton ginners in multiple states. 5. ARS developed an infrared-blanching and hot-air drying system for fruit and vegetables that reduced energy use 75 percent; a patent for the system was exclusively licensed to Treasure8. (Left to right): Dave Spivack (Treasure8), Kaylin Punotai (ARS intern), Hamed El-Mashad (UC-Davis), ARS Research Leader Tara McHugh, Yi Shen (UC-Davis), ARS Research Engineer Zhongli Pan; Asher Wenig (Treasure8), Ruihong Zhang (UC-Davis), and Chandrasekar Venkitasamy (UC-Davis). National Program 213 BIOREFINING & National Program 306 QUALITY AND UTILIZATION OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS ACCOMPLISHMENT REPORTS 2013-2017 CONTENTS ARS Accomplishment Reports 2013-2017 ................................................................................................ 1 NP 213: Components and Problem Statements ....................................................................................... 2 COMPONENT 1 – Biochemical Conversion ........................................................................................ 2 COMPONENT 2 – Biodiesel .................................................................................................................. 2 COMPONENT 3 – Pyrolysis (Thermolysis) ......................................................................................... 2 NP 306: Components and Problem Statements ....................................................................................... 3 COMPONENT 1 – Food ........................................................................................................................ 3 COMPONENT 2 – Nonfood .................................................................................................................. 3 NP 213 Accomplishment Report 2013-2017 ............................................................................................. 5 BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................ 5 PLANNING AND COORDINATION FOR THE NP 213 5-YEAR CYCLE .................................... 6 STRUCTURE OF NATIONAL PROGRAM 213 ................................................................................ 7 RELATIONSHIP OF NP 213 TO OTHER NATIONAL PROGRAMS ........................................... 8 HOW THIS REPORT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND WHAT IT REFLECTS ................................ 9 COMPONENT 1: Biochemical Conversion ........................................................................................... 11 Problem Statement 1 ......................................................................................................................... 12 Problem Statement 2: ....................................................................................................................... 14 Problem Statement 3 ......................................................................................................................... 17 COMPONENT 2: Biodiesel ..................................................................................................................... 19 Problem Statement 1 ......................................................................................................................... 19 Problem Statement 2 ......................................................................................................................... 20 Problem Statement 3 ......................................................................................................................... 22 COMPONENT 3: Pyrolysis (Thermolysis) ............................................................................................. 24 Problem Statement 1 ......................................................................................................................... 24 Problem Statement 2 ......................................................................................................................... 27 NP 306 Accomplishment Report 2013-2017 ........................................................................................... 30 BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INFORMATION ...................................................................... 30 PLANNING AND COORDINATION FOR THE NP 306 5-YEAR CYCLE .................................. 31 STRUCTURE OF NATIONAL PROGRAM 306 .............................................................................. 32 COMPONENT 1: Food .................................................................................................................... 32 COMPONENT 2: Nonfood .............................................................................................................. 32 RELATIONSHIP OF NP 306 TO OTHER NATIONAL PROGRAMS ......................................... 33 HOW THIS REPORT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND WHAT IT REFLECTS .............................. 34 COMPONENT 1: Food ............................................................................................................................ 36 Problem Statement 1.A ..................................................................................................................... 36 Problem Statement 1.B ..................................................................................................................... 38 Problem Statement 1.C ..................................................................................................................... 40 COMPONENT 2: Nonfood (including hides) ......................................................................................... 43 Problem Statement 2.A ..................................................................................................................... 43 Problem Statement 2.B ..................................................................................................................... 46 Problem Statement 2.C ..................................................................................................................... 49 APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 51 APPENDIX 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 58 APPENDIX 3 ............................................................................................................................................. 92 APPENDIX 4 ........................................................................................................................................... 263 APPENDIX 5 ........................................................................................................................................... 265 United States Department of Agriculture Research, Education, and Economics AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE National Program 213 Biorefining National Program 306 Quality and Utilization of Agricultural Products ARS Accomplishment Reports 2013-2017 The mission of the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is to conduct research to develop and transfer solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority and provide information access and dissemination to ensure high-quality, safe food, and other agricultural products; assess the nutritional needs of Americans; sustain a competitive agricultural economy; enhance the natural resource base and the environment; provide economic opportunities for rural citizens, communities, and society as a whole; and provide the infrastructure necessary to create and maintain a diversified workplace. All ARS research projects are assigned to at least one of sixteen ARS National Programs managed by National Program Leaders and other ARS senior staff. This oversight ensures all work conducted by ARS scientists is relevant, significant, and has high scientific merit. The research under two of these National Programs, Biorefining (NP 213) and Quality and Utilization of Agricultural Products (NP 306), focuses on the needs and issues of agricultural producers and processers who produce food, fibers, bioenergy, and other biobased products from harvested agricultural products. Goals for these two National Programs include enhancing product quality, improving product processing, developing new value-added products, and reducing the environmental impacts of postharvest agricultural production. Meeting these goals supports agricultural producers and others in rural communities by increasing market demand for their goods and increasing the value of their production. NP 213 and NP 306 research projects are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Impact of Ethanol Use on Food Prices and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Pub
    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE A CBO PAPER APRIL 2009 The Impact of Ethanol Use on Food Prices and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Pub. No. 3155 A CBO PAPER The Impact of Ethanol Use on Food Prices and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions April 2009 The Congress of the United States O Congressional Budget Office Notes Unless otherwise indicated, all years referred to in this report are calendar years. On the cover: Cornfield, copyright JupiterImages; bowl of breakfast cereal, photo by Scott Bauer, courtesy of the U.S. Department of Agriculture; and grocery store and traffic, images by Maureen Costantino. Preface The production and use of ethanol in the United States have been steadily increasing since 2001, boosted in part by long-standing production subsidies. That growth has exerted upward pressure on the price of corn and, ultimately, on the retail price of food, affecting both individual consumers and federal expenditures on nutritional support programs. It has also raised questions about the environmental consequences of replacing gasoline with ethanol. This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis, which was prepared at the request of Representatives Ron Kind, Rosa DeLauro, and James McGovern, examines the relationship between increasing production of ethanol and rising prices for food. In particular, CBO esti- mated how much of the rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008 was due to an increase in the production of ethanol and how much that increase in prices might raise federal expenditures on food assistance programs. CBO also examined how much the increased use of ethanol might lower emissions of greenhouse gases.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Demand for Non-Food Crops
    Market demand for non-food crops Inventarisation of the present situation Harriëtte Bos, Wolter Elbersen, Karin Molenveld, WageningenUR, the Netherlands Carlos Cadórniga Valiño, INIA, Spain Efi Alexopoulou, CRES, Greece Report 4FCrops task 1.3 Colophon Title Market demand for non food crops Author(s) Harriëtte Bos , Wolter Elbersen, Carlos Cadórniga Valiño, Efi Alexopoulou AFSG number AFSG number ISBN -number ISBN number Date of publication Date of publication Confidentiality No OPD code OPD code Approved by Name of approving official Agrotechnology and Food Sciences Group P.O. Box 17 NL-6700 AA Wageningen Tel: +31 (0)317 475 024 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.afsg.wur.nl © Agrotechnology and Food Innovations b.v. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system of any nature, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. The publisher does not accept any liability for inaccuracies in this report. The quality management system of Agrotechnology and Food Innovations b.v. is certified by SGS International Certification Services EESV according to ISO 9001:2000. 2 © Agrotechnology and Food Innovations b.v., member of Wageningen UR Summary This report summarizes the results of task 1.3 of the 4FCrops project. Methods In this report an estimation is presented of the present day non-food markets for renewable materials. These markets cover a wide range of products, ranging from paper and wood to specialty chemicals and high value added plastics. Estimation of the market size was made starting from the Eurostat data of manufactures goods.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, CH 9.10.2.2: Peanut Processing
    9.10.2.2 Peanut Processing 9.10.2.2.1 General Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea), also known as groundnuts or goobers, are an annual leguminous herb native to South America. The peanut peduncle, or peg (the stalk that holds the flower), elongates after flower fertilization and bends down into the ground, where the peanut seed matures. Peanuts have a growing period of approximately 5 months. Seeding typically occurs mid-April to mid-May, and harvesting during August in the United States. Light, sandy loam soils are preferred for peanut production. Moderate rainfall of between 51 and 102 centimeters (cm) (20 and 40 inches [in.]) annually is also necessary. The leading peanut producing states are Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Florida, and Oklahoma. 9.10.2.2.2 Process Description The initial step in processing is harvesting, which typically begins with the mowing of mature peanut plants. Then the peanut plants are inverted by specialized machines, peanut inverters, that dig, shake, and place the peanut plants, with the peanut pods on top, into windrows for field curing. After open-air drying, mature peanuts are picked up from the windrow with combines that separate the peanut pods from the plant using various thrashing operations. The peanut plants are deposited back onto the fields and the pods are accumulated in hoppers. Some combines dig and separate the vines and stems from the peanut pods in 1 step, and peanuts harvested by this method are cured in storage. Some small producers still use traditional harvesting methods, plowing the plants from the ground and manually stacking them for field curing.
    [Show full text]
  • Good Manufacturing Practices and Industry Best Practices for Peanut
    GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES AND INDUSTRY BEST PRACTICES FOR PEANUT PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS Revised October 2009 The American Peanut Council 1500 King Street, Suite 301 Alexandria, Virginia _____________________________________________________________ Any reproduction of the information contained in this document requires the express written consent of the American Peanut Council, 1500 King Street, Suite 301, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. Contents DEFINITION OF TERMS .............................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 5 GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES ................................................................................................... 7 Personnel Practices ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Establishing a Training Program .............................................................................................................. 8 Educate workers on the importance of proper hand washing techniques ................................................. 8 Building and Facilities ................................................................................................................................. 9 Plants and Grounds ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Research 1..8
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221902546 Influence of Fungal Endophyte Infection on Phenolic Content and Antioxidant Activity in Grasses: Interaction between Lolium perenne and Different Strains of Neotyphodium lolii Article in Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · March 2012 DOI: 10.1021/jf204105k · Source: PubMed CITATIONS READS 34 339 4 authors, including: Abdel Qawasmeh Hassan K Obied Hebron University Charles Sturt University 7 PUBLICATIONS 149 CITATIONS 38 PUBLICATIONS 1,177 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Warwick Wheatley Charles Sturt University 10 PUBLICATIONS 99 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Ethnobotany: A living Science for Alleviating Human Suffering View project Pharmacist perception and knowledge about CAM. View project All content following this page was uploaded by Abdel Qawasmeh on 01 January 2019. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Article pubs.acs.org/JAFC Influence of Fungal Endophyte Infection on Phenolic Content and Antioxidant Activity in Grasses: Interaction between Lolium perenne and Different Strains of Neotyphodium lolii Abdelqader Qawasmeh,† Hassan K. Obied,*,§ Anantanarayanan Raman,† and Warwick Wheatley† † School of Agricultural and Wine Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia § School of Biomedical Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia ABSTRACT: Lolium perenne is a major forage and turf grass, which is often naturally infected with a “wild-type” strain (EWT)of the fungal endophyte Neotyphodium lolii, establishing a symbiotic relationship. In this study, the impacts of different strains wild type EWT, AR1 (EAR1) and AR37 (EAR37), of N.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT SHI, XIAOLEI. Effects of Different
    ABSTRACT SHI, XIAOLEI. Effects of Different Roasting Conditions on Peanut Quality. (Under the direction of Dr. Lisa L. Dean and Dr. K.P. Sandeep). In the U.S., a major portion of the peanut crop is converted from whole seed into value-added products. For such purposes, the peanut seeds are processed using a thermal operation as the first step in the manufacture of the final products, to achieve specific flavors, colors, and textures. Peanuts are typically processed by dry roasting or oil roasting (deep frying and blister frying). Comparisons among different dry roasting conditions and different roasting methods were made in this work regarding their effects on the quality-related properties of roasted peanuts. On an industrial scale, peanuts are typically roasted to a specific color for quality control. Recent lab scale experiments demonstrated that peanuts roasted to equivalent surface colors at different time/temperature combinations could vary substantially in chemical and physical properties related to product quality. This study expanded that approach to a pilot plant scale roaster. Jumbo-size runner-type peanuts were systematically roasted at 5 temperatures (149-204 °C) to three Hunter L-values of 53.0, 48.5, and 43.0 using the same peanut bed depth and air flow. The flavor of medium dry roasted peanuts was superior to light and dark roasts, with higher roasted peanutty and sweet aromatic flavor notes. Total tocopherols of oil extracted from the roasted peanuts was greatest in peanuts roasted to darker colors, with the medium and dark oil showing no significant differences from the raw oil.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roasted and the Boiled: Food Composition and Heat Treatment with Special Emphasis on Pit-Hearth Cooking
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Anthropology Faculty Publications Anthropology, Department of 1-1997 The Roasted and the Boiled: Food Composition and Heat Treatment with Special Emphasis on Pit-Hearth Cooking LuAnn Wandsnider University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/anthropologyfacpub Part of the Anthropology Commons Wandsnider, LuAnn, "The Roasted and the Boiled: Food Composition and Heat Treatment with Special Emphasis on Pit-Hearth Cooking" (1997). Anthropology Faculty Publications. 28. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/anthropologyfacpub/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16 (1997) , pp. 1–48. Copyright © 1997 Academic Press. Used by permission. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa Submitted March 1, 1996; revised October 17, 1996; accepted October 20, 1996. The Roasted and the Boiled: Food Composition and Heat Treatment with Special Emphasis on Pit-Hearth Cooking LuAnn Wandsnider Department of Anthropology, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0368 Abstract Heat treatment is one of the major ways humans change the composition and chemistry of food tis- sues, making them more digestible, less toxic, and more durable. This paper reviews salient features of food chemistry and food composition and how heat treatment, especially pit-hearth cooking, af- fects that composition. Ethnographic accounts of cooking indicate that traditional populations relied on pit-hearth cooking especially to alter the composition of foods high in either lipids or complex carbohydrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinetic Studies and Moisture Diffusivity During Cocoa Bean Roasting
    processes Article Kinetic Studies and Moisture Diffusivity During Cocoa Bean Roasting Leydy Ariana Domínguez-Pérez 1, Ignacio Concepción-Brindis 1, Laura Mercedes Lagunes-Gálvez 1 , Juan Barajas-Fernández 2, Facundo Joaquín Márquez-Rocha 3 and Pedro García-Alamilla 1,* 1 División Académica de Ciencias Agropecuarias (DACA), Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco (UJAT), Carret. Villahermosa-Teapa Km 25 Ra. La Huasteca. Centro, Tabasco. C.P. 86280, Mexico; [email protected] (L.A.D.-P.); [email protected] (I.C.-B.); [email protected] (L.M.L.-G.) 2 División Académica de Ingeniería y Arquitectura (DAIA), Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco (UJAT), Carret. Cunduacán-Jalpa de Méndez Km 1. Col. La Esmeralda. Cunduacán, Tabasco. C.P. 86690, Mexico; [email protected] 3 Centro Regional para la Producción más Limpia, Instituto Politecnico Nacional, Tabasco Business Center, Edificio FINTAB, Carretera Reforma-Dos Bocas, Km. 17+920, Ranch. Pechucalco, 2da. sección, Cunduacán, Tabasco, C.P. 86691, Mexico; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 17 September 2019; Accepted: 18 October 2019; Published: 21 October 2019 Abstract: Cocoa bean roasting allows for reactions to occur between the characteristic aroma and taste precursors that are involved in the sensory perception of chocolate and cocoa by-products. This work evaluates the moisture kinetics of cocoa beans during the roasting process by applying empirical and semi-empirical exponential models. Four roasting temperatures (100, 140, 180, and 220 ◦C) were used in a cylindrically designed toaster. Three reaction kinetics were tested (pseudo zero order, pseudo first order, and second order), along with 10 exponential models (Newton, Page, Henderson and Pabis, Logarithmic, Two-Term, Midilli, Verma, Diffusion Approximation, Silva, and Peleg).
    [Show full text]
  • Cooking Temperatures (Oven)
    Cooking Temperatures (Oven) 1. Bottom Round Roast- Bake at 325 degrees for an hour and a half or until internal temperature is 135 degrees 2. Eye Round Roast- Cook at 350 degrees F for 20 for 25 minutes per pound. 30 minutes per pound at 350 degrees F until Internal Temperatures reaches 175 degrees F 3. Top Round Roast- Bake for 15 minutes at 450 degrees. Then reduce the oven to 325 degrees and bake for an hour or until an instant read thermometer reads 135 to 140 degrees. Remove from the oven and tent with tin foil for 15 minutes. 4. Chuck Roast- Sear first! Cover and roast at 250 degrees on the center rack for 2 hours. Remove from oven and take roast from pan - best in crockpot 5. Top Sirloin Roast- Place in the oven at 375 degrees, and roast until you reach an internal temperature of 130 F for medium rare. For each additional 'step' of doneness, add ten degrees. So medium would be 140, medium-well, 150, and well-done 160. 6. Brisket- Preheat the oven or smoker to 225 degrees F. Trim the fat evenly across the top to 1/4-inch thick. Season the brisket liberally with the seasoning rub. Cook in the oven or smoker until the internal temperature on an instant- read meat thermometer reaches 175 degrees F, about 6 to 8 hours. 7. Standing Rib Roast- Bake at 350 degrees for 16 to 18 minutes a pound, to an internal temperature of 120 degrees. For a 7-pound roast, that's going to be about two hours 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Sinapate Dehydrodimers and Sinapate-Ferulate Heterodimers In
    J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 1427−1434 1427 Sinapate Dehydrodimers and Sinapate−Ferulate Heterodimers in Cereal Dietary Fiber MIRKO BUNZEL,*,† JOHN RALPH,‡,§ HOON KIM,‡,§ FACHUANG LU,‡,§ SALLY A. RALPH,# JANE M. MARITA,‡,§ RONALD D. HATFIELD,‡ AND HANS STEINHART† Institute of Biochemistry and Food Chemistry, Department of Food Chemistry, University of Hamburg, Grindelallee 117, 20146 Hamburg, Germany; U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madison, Wisconsin 53706; Department of Forestry, University of WisconsinsMadison, Madison, Wisconsin 53706; and U.S. Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madison, Wisconsin 53705 Two 8-8-coupled sinapic acid dehydrodimers and at least three sinapate-ferulate heterodimers have been identified as saponification products from different insoluble and soluble cereal grain dietary fibers. The two 8-8-disinapates were authenticated by comparison of their GC retention times and mass spectra with authentic dehydrodimers synthesized from methyl or ethyl sinapate using two different single-electron metal oxidant systems. The highest amounts (481 µg/g) were found in wild rice insoluble dietary fiber. Model reactions showed that it is unlikely that the dehydrodisinapates detected are artifacts formed from free sinapic acid during the saponification procedure. The dehydrodisinapates presumably derive from radical coupling of sinapate-polymer esters in the cell wall; the radical coupling origin is further confirmed by finding 8-8 and 8-5 (and possibly 8-O-4) sinapate-ferulate cross-products. Sinapates therefore appear to have an analogous role to ferulates in cross-linking polysaccharides in cereal grains and presumably grass cell walls in general.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Resources from Arizona Trees and Shrubs*
    5764 Forest Ecology and Management, 16 (1986) 155-167 155 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands Renewable Resources from Arizona Trees and Shrubs* MERLE E. CARRI, CHARLES T. MASON Jr.2and MARVIN O. BAGBY3 INo.rthem Regional Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Departmentof Agriculture""', Peoria.. IL 61604 (U.S.A.) 2Herbarium, College ofAgriculture, University ofArizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 (U.S.A.) 3Northem Agricultural Energy Center, Northern Regional Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Peoria, IL 61604 (U.S.A.) (Accepted 11 March 1986) ABSTRACT Carr, M.E., Mason Jr., Ch.T. andBagby, M.O., 1986. Renewable resources from Arizona trees and shrubs. For. EcoL Manage., 16: 155-167. Plants of 100 tree and shrub species from arid and semiarid regions ofArizona were examined botanically and chemically for their multipurpose potential as renewable sources of industrial raw materials. Analytical and botanical features are presented here for only 12 ofthe. more promising species. Samples of the 100 species were analyzed for yields of oils, polyphenols. hydrocarbons, and cxude proteins. Classes of oil constituents were identified. Contents of fatty acids and unsa­ poniflllble matterofsaponifiedoils were determined. Hydrocarbons were analyzedfor thepresence of rubber and gutta (polyisoprenes). Polyisoprenes were analyzed for average molecular weight and molecular weight distribution. Impressive yields ofoil and/orpolyphenol were extracted from Asclepias linaria, JugUms major, Ligustrurnjaponicurn, Mimosa biunci{era, Mortonia scabreUa, Olea europaea, and Rhus chariophyLla. Of these, O. europaea and L. Japonicum of the Oleaceae are rapid-growing, evergreen species with low to moderate moisture requirements and very good adaptability to pollarding.
    [Show full text]
  • Elucidating the Multifunctional Role of the Cell Wall Components in the Maize Exploitation
    Elucidating The Multifunctional Role of The Cell Wall Components in The Maize Exploitation Ana López-Malvar ( [email protected] ) Universidade de Vigo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5079-7132 Rosa Ana Malvar Mision Biologica de Galicia Xose Carlos Souto Universidade de Vigo Escola de Enxeneria Forestal Leonardo Dario Gomez CNAP Rachael Simister CNAP Antonio Encina Universidad de Leon Facultad de Ciencias Biologicas y Ambientales Jaime Barros-Rios University of North Texas Sonia Pereira-Crespo LIGAL Rogelio Santiago Universidade de Vigo Facultad de Biologia Research article Keywords: maize, saccharication, digestibility, pest resistance, cell wall Posted Date: August 21st, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-50191/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Version of Record: A version of this preprint was published at BMC Plant Biology on June 2nd, 2021. See the published version at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-021-03040-3. Page 1/26 Abstract Background: Besides the use of maize grain as food and feed, maize stover can be a protable by-product for cellulosic ethanol production, whereas the whole plant can be used in silage production. However, yield is reduced by pest damages, where stem corn borers are one of the most important factors limiting yield. Overall, cell wall composition is key in determining the quality of maize biomass, as well as pest resistance. This study aims to address the interrelations between cell wall components in diverse maize
    [Show full text]