| Literature DB >> 34770743 |
Maya-Sétan Diakité1,2, Hélène Lenormand1, Vincent Lequart2, Santiago Arufe1, Patrick Martin2, Nathalie Leblanc1.
Abstract
The use of agricultural by-products in the building engineering realm has led to an increase in insulation characteristics of biobased materials and a decrease in environmental impact. The understanding of cell wall structure is possible by the study of interactions of chemical compounds, themselves determined by common techniques like Van Soest (VS). In this study, a global method is investigated to characterise the cell wall of hemp shiv. The cell wall molecules were, at first, isolated by fractionation of biomass and then analysed by physical and chemical analysis (Thermal Gravimetric Analysis, Elementary Analysis, Dynamic Sorption Vapor and Infra-Red). This global method is an experimental way to characterise plant cell wall molecules of fractions by Thermal Gravimetric Analysis following by a mathematical method to have a detailed estimation of the cell wall composition and the interactions between plant macromolecules. The analyzed hemp shiv presents proportions of 2.5 ± 0.6% of water, 4.4 ± 0.2% of pectins, 42.6 ± 1.0% (Hemicellulose-Cellulose), 18.4 ± 1.6% (Cellulose-Hemicellulose), 29.0 ± 0.8% (Lignin-Cellulose) and 2.0 ± 0.4% of linked lignin.Entities:
Keywords: TGA; Van Soest method; bio-based materials; biomass; cell wall; hemp shiv
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34770743 PMCID: PMC8587414 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26216334
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Hemp shiv chemical composition according to the bibliography and expressed in percentage (% w/w dry mass).
| References | Cellulose | Hemicellulose | Lignin | Soluble Compounds | Proteins | Ashes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hussain et al., 2018 [ | 44.0 | 18.0–27.0 | 22.0–28.0 | 1.0–6.0 | - | 1.0–2.0 |
| Vignon et al., 1995 [ | 44.0 | 18.0 | 28.0 | 5.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| Thomsen et al., 2005 [ | 48.0 | 21.0–25.0 | 17.0–19.0 | - | - | - |
| Gandolfi et al., 2013 [ | 44.0 | 25.0 | 23.0 | 4.0 | 1.2 | |
| Garcia-Jaldon, 1995 [ | 48.0 | 12.0 | 28.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| Arufe et al., 2021 [ | 49.0 | 21.6 | 8.1 | 17.2 | 4.1 | |
| Arufe et al., 2021 [ | 46.1 | 21.5 | 8.5 | 21.1 | 2.8 | |
| Cappelletto et al., 2001 [ | 51.6 | 21.5 | 12.9 | 12.9 | 6.6 | |
| Godin et al., 2010 [ | 47.5 | 6.4 | 8.0 | 29.4 | 8.8 | |
| Viel et al., 2018 [ | 49.9 | 21.4 | 9.5 | 17.7 | 0.6 | |
Figure 1Chemical composition of Van Soest fractions.
Proposed determination protocol of onset (To), peak (Tp) and final (Tf) characteristic temperatures of thermal transitions employing TGA data.
| Nomenclature | 1st Derivative | 2nd Derivative |
|---|---|---|
| To | dm/dT = 0 | Inflexion point of d2m/dT2 vs. T |
| Tp | LM | d2m/dT2 = 0 |
| Tf | dm/dT = 0 | Inflexion point of d2m/dT2 vs. T |
LM: Local Minimum.
Cell wall hemp shiv composition by Van Soest method (% w/w). Number of repetitions = 6.
| Cellulose | Hemicellulose | Soluble Compounds | Lignin | Ashes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry basis | 49.0 ± 2.8 | 21.5 ± 1.7 | 18.6 ± 0.8 | 8.1 ± 0.6 | 2.8 ± 0.1 |
| Organic mass (g ×/100 g organic mass) | 50.4 ± 2.8 | 22.2 ± 1.8 | 19.1 ± 0.8 | 8.3 ± 0.6 | - |
Percentage of C, H, N, S, O elements (% mg) in fractions of non-destructive Van Soest method and control. Number of repetitions = 3.
| % Carbon | % Hydrogen | % Nitrogen | % Sulfur | % Oxygen Calculated | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 45.5 ± 0.1 | 6.2 ± 0.1 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.1 | 48.3 ± 0.1 |
| FA | 44.9 ± 0.1 | 6.3 ± 0.1 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.01 ± 0.1 | 48.7 ± 0.1 |
| FB | 46.1 ± 0.1 | 6.3 ± 0.2 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0 | 47.5 ± 0.1 |
| FC | 53.3 ± 0.5 | 5.4 ± 0.1 | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 1.86 ± 0.1 | 39.4 ± 0.2 |
Figure 2Comparative histogram bar chart of elementary analysis between control and fractions.
Figure 3FTIR spectra of samples (Van Soest fractions and control).
Figure 4TGA hemp shiv fraction curves under Ar (a) and O2 (b).
Figure 5First derivatives ratio of Van Soest Fractions in compared to Control under argon (a) and oxygen (b).
Cell wall composition estimation (g/100g dry mass) under argon and oxygen with TGA 1. Number of repetitions = 3.
| Cell Wall Compounds | Control | FA | FB | FC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Water | 2.7 ± 0.8 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 2.3 ± 1.2 |
| Pectins | 3.5 ± 0.6 | 83.8 ± 1.2 | 4.0 ± 0.3 | ||
| (Hemicellulose–Cellulose) | 24.7 ± 4.6 | 23.5 ± 2.1 | 8.6 ± 1.1 | ||
| (Lignin–Cellulose) | 38.8 ± 6.4 | 53.7 ± 3.4 | 17.6 ± 1.0 | ||
|
| Water | 2.5 ± 0.6 | 2.0 ± 0.0 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.1 |
| Pectins | 4.4 ± 0.2 | 74.6 ± 0.2 | 80.3 ± 1.0 | 5.2 ± 0.3 | |
| (Hemicellulose–Cellulose) | 42.6 ± 1.0 | 19.7 ± 10.7 | |||
| (Cellulose–Hemicellulose) | 18.4 ± 1.6 | 26.4 ± 1.9 | |||
| (Lignin–Cellulose) | 29.0 ± 0.8 | 22.7 ± 0.3 | 16.6 ± 0.9 | 48.3 ± 3.8 | |
| Lignin | 2.0 ± 0.4 |
1 This cell wall composition estimation was based on Table 2.
Figure 6Moisture adsorption and desorption behaviour on Van Soest fraction at 23 °C. Number of repetitions = 2; SD max = 3.5%.
Figure 7Specific area of Van Soest fraction (a). Number of repetitions = 2.
Figure 8Comparative scheme of chemical composition results obtained with classic method Van Soest and the investigated method.