Towards A Deeper Understanding Of Structural Biomass Recalcitrance Using Phase-contrast Tomography.

The development of technological routes to convert lignocellulosic biomass to liquid fuels requires an in-depth understanding of the cell wall architecture of substrates. Essential pretreatment processes are conducted to reduce biomass recalcitrance and usually increase the reactive surface area. Quantitative three-dimensional information about both bulk and surface structural features of substrates needs to be obtained to expand our knowledge of substrates. In this work, phase-contrast tomography (PCT) was used to gather information about the structure of a model lignocellulosic biomass (piassava fibers). The three-dimensional cellular organization of piassava fibers was characterized by PCT using synchrotron radiation. This technique enabled important physical features that describe the substrate piassava fibers to be visualized and quantified. The external surface area of a fiber and internal surface area of the pores in a fiber could be determined separately. More than 96% of the overall surface area available to enzymes was in the bulk substrate. The pore surface area and length exhibited a positive linear relationship, where the slope of this relationship depended on the plant tissue. We demonstrated that PCT is a powerful tool for the three-dimensional characterization of the cell wall features related to biomass recalcitrance. Original and relevant quantitative information about the structural features of the analyzed material were obtained. The data obtained by PCT can be used to improve processing routes to efficiently convert biomass feedstock into sugars.

A responsabilidade de traduzir o in-traduzível: Jacques Derrida e o desejo de [la] tradução

How should one consider the responsibility of the translator, who is located between the differences of two linguistic systems and in the middle of the various idioms constitute each of the languages involved in the translation? (P. Ottoni). What is the role of the translator in inter-acting with both his/her mother tongue and the idiom of the other? These two questions will be discussed in order to reflect on the responsibility of translating the un-translatable. Two hypotheses orient the paper: 1 - an idiom spoken idiomatically is known as the mother tongue and is not appropriated, so that accommodating the other in one's own language automatically considers his/her idiom (J. Derrida) and 2 - face-to-face with language and its idioms, the translator is trapped in a double (responsibility) bind; faced with something which cannot be translated, he/she is forced to perceive it in another way. In conclusion, how should one consider the responsibility of translating the un-translatable Jacques Derrida?