Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts

Table 2 Analysis of variance in total sugar yield^a

From: Cellulosic ethanol: interactions between cultivar and enzyme loading in wheat straw processing

Sugar yield (ANOVA): Model A
	Df num	Df den	F value	Pr > F	Significance
Enzyme loading	2	68	8486.04	< 0.0001	***
Cultivar	4	68	2.10	0.0907	n.s.
Enzyme loading × cultivar	8	68	4.66	0.0001	***
Sugar yield (ANOVA): Model B
	Df num	Df den	F value	Pr > F	Significance
Cultivar	4	20	9.01	0.0002	***
	Mean sugar yield (g g ^-1 ptb)
Hereford	0.292^a
Ambition	0.287^ab
Smuggler	0.282^ab
Frument	0.272^b
Skalmeje	0.249^c
Sugar yield (ANOVA): Model C
	Df	Sum sq	Mean Sq	Pr > F	Significance
Batch	9	0.019	0.0022	< 0.0001	***
Size	2	0.023	0.011	< 0.0001	***
Batch × size	18	0.00086	0.000048	0.2831	n.s.
Residual	59	0.0023	0.000039
	Mean sugar yield (g g ^-1 dm ptb)
Small	0.295^a
Medium	0.268^b
Coarse	0.257^c

^aAnalysis of variance (ANOVA) of total sugar yield (g g ^-1 dm pretreated biomass) affected by cultivar and enzyme loading in model A, by cultivar from total fractions of the second hydrolysis in model B and by batch, size and interaction from coarse, medium and small fraction in model C. Mean sugar yield (n = 3) with different numbers are significantly different (P ≥ 0.05). Significance values: *P = 0.05, **P = 0.01 and ***P = 0.001; n.s. = not significant.

Back to article page

ISSN: 2731-3654

Contact us

General enquiries: journalsubmissions@springernature.com