Assessing the enzymatic effects of cellulases and LPMO in improving mechanical fibrillation of cotton linters

Table 2 Effects of enzymatic pretreatments on fibre morphology and on mechanical fibrillation

	Pulp			After mechanical fibrillation
	Fibre width (μm)	Fibre length (mm)	Fines (%)	Yield (%)	Transmittance at 700 nm (%)
R	25.5	0.25	52.58	0	2.4 ± 0.5
C_k	24.9	0.25	53.7	0	3.2 ± 0.7
C₉	24.7	0.24	55.43	0	7.8 ± 0.3
C₅₀	24.2	0.22	59.25	0	45.6 ± 1.2
C_F	24.8	0.22	59.01	0	32.9 ± 0.9
C_ll	23.2	0.21	62.18	0	27.9 ± 0.8
C_mix	21.2	0.18	70.44	18 ± 1	52.7 ± 0.9
S_k	25.1	0.25	52.8	0	3.8 ± 0.5
S	23.3	0.21	61.58	2.5 ± 2	4.3 ± 0.4
SC_mix	23.2	0.16	73.5	23 ± 1	51.8 ± 0.5
L_Tempo	23.0	0.23	57.13	10 ± 2	4.5 ± 0.6
Com	–	–	–	11 ± 2	5.7 ± 0.7

The confidence interval of the fibre width, fibre length and fines was less than 2% in all cases
R (initial refined pulp), C_k (cellulase control treatment), C₅₀ (Sertec20 cellulase), C_F (Fibercare cellulase), C_ll (Celluclast cellulase) C₉ (Cel9B), C_mix (cellulase mixture consisting in Fibercare and Celluclast), S_k (LPMO control treatment), S (LPMO), SC_mix (LPMO and C_mix), L_Tempo (Laccase_Tempo treatment) and Com (commercial NFC)

ISSN: 2731-3654