生物质基酸性低共熔溶剂用于高效溶解木质素及溶解机理

doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB202212043

物理化学学报 >> 2023, Vol. 39 >> Issue (7): 2212043.doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202212043

生物质基酸性低共熔溶剂用于高效溶解木质素及溶解机理

韩慧贤¹, 陈澜¹, 赵建成²^,³, 于海涛¹, 汪洋¹, 闫何恋¹, 王英雄⁴, 薛智敏¹^,*(), 牟天成⁵^,*()

¹ 北京林业大学林木生物质化学北京市重点实验室, 北京 100083
² 中国科学院煤炭化学研究所生物炼制山西工程研究中心, 太原 030001
³ 中国科学院大学材料科学与光电工程中心, 北京 100049
⁴ 太原理工大学化学学院, 太原 030024
⁵ 中国人民大学化学系, 北京 100872

收稿日期:2022-12-27 录用日期:2023-01-18 发布日期:2023-03-06
通讯作者: 薛智敏,牟天成 E-mail:zmxue@bjfu.edu.cn;tcmu@ruc.edu.cn
作者简介:第一联系人：
^† These authors contributed equally to the manuscript.
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(21873012);国家自然科学基金(22073112)

Biomass-based Acidic Deep Eutectic Solvents for Efficient Dissolution of Lignin: Towards Performance and Mechanism Elucidation

Huixian Han¹, Lan Chen¹, Jiancheng Zhao²^,³, Haitao Yu¹, Yang Wang¹, Helian Yan¹, Yingxiong Wang⁴, Zhimin Xue¹^,*(), Tiancheng Mu⁵^,*()

¹ Beijing Key Laboratory of Lignocellulosic Chemistry, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
² Shanxi Engineering Research Center of Biorefinery, Institute of Coal Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Taiyuan 030001, China
³ Center of Materials Science and Optoelectronics Engineering, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
⁴ College of Chemistry, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, China
⁵ Department of Chemistry, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China

Received:2022-12-27 Accepted:2023-01-18 Published:2023-03-06
Contact: Zhimin Xue, Tiancheng Mu E-mail:zmxue@bjfu.edu.cn;tcmu@ruc.edu.cn
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China(21873012);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(22073112)

1. WHXB202212043-SI-10p.pdf(1970KB)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

设计能高效溶解木质素的溶剂对木质素的高值化利用具有重要意义。本文中设计了基于氯化胆碱、甜菜碱和左旋肉碱作为氢键受体(HBA)和四种氢键供体(HBD)的生物质衍生的酸性低共熔溶剂(DESs)，可以溶解包括碱木质素(AL)、脱碱木质素(DAL)、酶解木质素(EHL)和硫酸盐木质素(KL)在内的不同类型的木质素。在大多数所设计的DESs中，EHL比AL、KL和DAL更容易溶解，而不同木质素中羟基的含量对木质素的溶解有显著影响，但是并非在所有DESs中木质素的溶解情况都符合上述规则。氯化胆碱是构建DESs的首选HBA，具有良好的性能并适应于不同类型木质素的溶解，而合适的酸度使苯甲酸和没食子酸乙酯成为对木质素溶解有利的HBDs。研究表明能有效溶解木质素的DESs应具有强的氢键酸度(α值> 0.95)以及与溶解的木质素匹配的合适极性。此外，HBD的pK_a值和DESs的酸度也是评价酸性DESs溶解木质素性能的有效指标。通常具有适中pK_a值的HBDs能够用于构建具有高效的木质素溶解性能的DESs。DESs的粘度对木质素溶解也有一定影响，较低的粘度有助于木质素溶解。

关键词: 木质素溶解, 低共熔溶剂, 生物质衍生溶剂, 氢键, 酸度, 极性

Abstract:

Lignocellulose utilization has the unique feature of net-zero carbon emissions. Thus, the utilization of lignocellulose as a renewable alternative to fossil-based carbon resources is one of the most promising strategies to achieve "carbon neutrality". Lignin has been recognized as the most abundant aromatic biopolymer on Earth; hence, it could be the most promising alternative to fossil-based aromatics. The efficient dissolution of lignin is crucial for lignin upgrading, which relies on the design of innovative and robust solvents. Herein, we designed several biomass-derived acidic deep eutectic solvents (DESs) using choline chloride, betaine, and L-carnitine as hydrogen bond acceptors (HBAs), and four protic compounds as hydrogen bond donors (HBDs), namely, oxalic acid, benzoic acid, ethyl gallate, and 5-methoxysalicylic acid. The designed DESs can dissolve different types of lignin, including alkali lignin (AL), dealkaline lignin (DAL), enzymatic hydrolysis lignin (EHL), and Kraft lignin (KL). Lignin dissolution was found to be affected by the relative contents of three phenylpropanoid monomers in lignin: syringyl (S), guaiacyl (G), and p-hydroxyphenyl (H) units. More S and fewer H units in lignin could result in higher solubility. G-, S-, and H-type structural units were found in EHL, while AL, KL, and DAL had only G-type structural units. Therefore, EHL could be more easily dissolved than AL, KL, and DAL in the most developed DESs. The hydroxyl group content of the four lignin samples had a significant impact on lignin dissolution. AL (1.98 mmol·g⁻¹) and EHL (1.93 mmol·g⁻¹) had much higher contents of phenolic hydroxyl groups than DAL (0.62 mmol·g⁻¹), implying that AL and EHL had higher polarity than DAL. This resulted in different dissolution behaviors in different DESs with varying polarities. However, the sulfonate groups afforded KL with much higher polarity, thus resulting in the special dissolution behavior of KL. It is to be noted that not all cases of dissolving lignin in the developed DESs conformed to the above rules. Therefore, it is necessary to further explore the effect of the properties of the DESs on the dissolution of different lignins. Choline chloride was the preferred HBA to construct DESs with good performance and adaptability to lignin dissolution, whereas suitable acidity enabled benzoic acid and ethyl gallate to be favorable HBDs. Systematic investigation revealed that an efficient DES for lignin dissolution should possess stronger hydrogen-bonding acidity (α > 0.95) and appropriate polarity matching with the dissolved lignin. In addition, the pK_a value of the HBD and the acidity of the DESs were also efficient indices for estimating the performance of an acidic DES in dissolving lignin, and the pK_a value and acidity could be well correlated with the polarity. Generally, HBDs (e.g., BA and EG in this study) with moderate pK_a values can be employed to construct robust DESs to dissolve lignin with satisfactory solubility. Additionally, the viscosity of the DESs should have an impact on lignin dissolution, and a lower viscosity is helpful for dissolving lignin. Therefore, the better performance of the developed ChCl-based DESs than the Betaine- and L-Carnitine-based DESs was partially because of the lower viscosity of the ChCl-based DESs.

Key words: Lignin dissolution, Deep eutectic solvents, Biomass-derived solvents, Hydrogen-bonding, Acidity, Polarity

韩慧贤, 陈澜, 赵建成, 于海涛, 汪洋, 闫何恋, 王英雄, 薛智敏, 牟天成. 生物质基酸性低共熔溶剂用于高效溶解木质素及溶解机理[J]. 物理化学学报, 2023, 39(7), 2212043. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202212043

Huixian Han, Lan Chen, Jiancheng Zhao, Haitao Yu, Yang Wang, Helian Yan, Yingxiong Wang, Zhimin Xue, Tiancheng Mu. Biomass-based Acidic Deep Eutectic Solvents for Efficient Dissolution of Lignin: Towards Performance and Mechanism Elucidation[J]. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2023, 39(7), 2212043. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202212043

链接本文: https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/10.3866/PKU.WHXB202212043

https://www.whxb.pku.edu.cn/CN/Y2023/V39/I7/2212043

图/表 9

Scheme 1

Fig 1

Table 1

Table 2

Fig 2

Table 3

Fig 3

Fig 4

Fig 5

参考文献 49

1	Tuck, C. O.; Pérez, E.; Horváth, I. T.; Sheldon, R. A.; Poliakoff, M.. Science 2012, 337 (6095),695. doi: 10.1126/science.1222566
2	Chen, Z.; Ragauskas, A.; Wan, C.. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020, 147, 112241. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112241
3	Wang, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhan, Z.; Tan, T.; Deng, W.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2022, 38 (10),2205032.
	王伟, 王瑶, 占自祥, 谭天, 邓卫平, 张庆红, 王野. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38 (10),2205032. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB2022205032
4	Zhou, H.; Jing, Y.; Wang, Y.. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2022, 38 (10),2203016.
	周浩, 景亚轩, 王艳芹. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38 (10),2203016. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB202203016
5	Ragauskas, A. J.; Beckham, G. T.; Biddy, M. J.; Chandra, R.; Chen, F.; Davis, M. F.; Davison, B. H.; Dixon, R. A.; Gilna, P.; Keller, M.; et al.. Science 2014, 344 (6185),1246843. doi: 10.1126/science.124684
6	Sun, Z.; Fridrich, B.; De Santi, A.; Elangovan, S.; Barta, K.. Chem. Rev. 2018, 118 (2),614. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00588
7	Luo, H.; Weeda, E. P.; Alherech, M.; Anson, C. W.; Karlen, S. D.; Cui, Y.; Foster, C. E.; Stahl, S. S.. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2021, 143 (37),15462. doi: 10.1021/jacs.1c08635
8	Adler, A.; Kumaniaev, I.; Karacic, A.; Baddigam, K. R.; Hanes, R. J.; Subbotina, E.; Bartling, A. W.; Huertas-Alonso, A. J.; Moreno, A.; Håkansson, H.. Joule 2022, 6 (8),1845. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2022.06.021
9	Sun, Z.; Cheng, J.; Wang, D.; Yuan, T.-Q.; Song, G.; Barta, K.. ChemSusChem 2020, 13 (19),5199. doi: 10.1002/cssc.202001085
10	Rinaldi, R.. Joule 2017, 1 (3),427. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2017.11.001
11	Hong, S.; Shen, X.; Xue, Z.; Sun, Z.; Yuan, T.. Green Chem. 2020, 22 (21),7219. doi: 10.1039/D0GC02439B
12	New, E. K.; Tnah, S. K.; Voon, K. S.; Yong, K. J.; Procentese, A.; Yee Shak, K. P.; Subramonian, W.; Cheng, C. K.; Wu, T. Y.. J. Environ. Manage. 2022, 307, 114385. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114385
13	Xue, Z.; Zhao, X.; Sun, R.; Mu, T.. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2016, 4 (7),3864. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b00639
14	Zhang, H.; Bai, Y.; Yu, B.; Liu, X.; Chen, F.. Green Chem. 2017, 19 (21),5152. doi: 10.1039/C7GC01974B
15	Yin, X.; Cai, T.; Liu, C.; Huang, C.; Wang, J.; Hu, J.; Li, N.; Jiang, J.; Wang, K.. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 437, 135408. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.135408
16	Yang, S.; Yang, X.; Meng, X.; Wang, L.. Green Chem. 2022, 24 (10),4082. doi: 10.1039/D2GC00409G
17	Jahan, N.; Huda, M. M.; Tran, Q. X.; Rai, N.. J. Phys. Chem. B 2022, 126 (31),5752. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c03147
18	Prinsen, P.; Narani, A.; Rothenberg, G. A.. ChemSusChem 2017, 10 (5),1022. doi: 10.1002/cssc.201601608
19	Strassberger, Z.; Prinsen, P.; Klis, F. V. D.; Es, D. S. V.; Tanase, S.; Rothenberg, G.. Green Chem. 2015, 17 (1),325. doi: 10.1039/C4GC01143K
20	Miao, S.; Atkin, R.; Warr, G.. Green Chem. 2022, 24 (19),7281. doi: 10.1039/D2GC02282F
21	Zhao, W.; Wei, C.; Cui, Y.; Ye, J.; He, B.; Liu, X.; Sun, J.. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 443, 136486. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.136486
22	Sathitsuksanoh, N.; Holtman, K. M.; Yelle, D. J.; Morgan, T.; Stavila, V.; Pelton, J.; Blanch, H.; Simmons, B. A.; George, A.. Green Chem. 2014, 16 (3),1236. doi: 10.1039/C3GC42295J
23	Liu, Q.; Zhao, X.; Yu, D.; Yu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Xue, Z.; Mu, T.. Green Chem. 2019, 21 (19),5291. doi: 10.1039/C9GC02306B
24	Yu, H.; Xue, Z.; Shi, R.; Zhou, F.; Mu, T.. Ind. Crops Prod. 2022, 184, 115049. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115049
25	Wang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Barta, K.; Deuss, P. J.. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10 (38),12569. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.2c02954
26	Abbott, A. P.; Capper, G.; Davies, D. L.; Rasheed, R. K.; Tambyrajah, V.. Chem. Commun. 2003, No.1, 70. doi: 10.1039/B210714G
27	Smith, E. L.; Abbott, A. P.; Ryder, K. S.. Chem. Rev. 2014, 114 (21),11060. doi: 10.1021/cr300162p
28	Abbott, A. P.; Boothby, D.; Capper, G.; Davies, D. L.; Rasheed, R. K.. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126 (29),9142. doi: 10.1021/ja048266j
29	Yu, D.; Xue, Z.; Mu, T.. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2021, 50 (15),8596. doi: 10.1039/D1CS90065J
30	Xia, Q.; Liu, Y.; Meng, J.; Cheng, W.; Chen, W.; Liu, S.; Liu, Y.; Li, J.; Yu, H.. Green Chem. 2018, 20 (12),2711. doi: 10.1039/C8GC00900G
31	Sosa, F. H. B.; Abranches, D. O.; Lopes, A. M.; Coutinho, J. A. P.; da Costa, M. C.. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8 (50),18577. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c06655
32	Malaeke, H.; Housaindokht, M. R.; Monhemi, H.; Izadyar, M.. J. Mol. Liq. 2018, 263, 193. doi: 10.1016/j.molliq.2018.05.001
33	Francisco, M.; Bruinhorst, A.; Kroon, M. C.. Green Chem. 2012, 14 (8),2153. doi: 10.1039/C2GC35660K
34	Wang, Y.; Meng, X.; Jeong, K.; Li, S.; Leem, G.; Kim, K. H.; Pu, Y.; Ragauskas, A. J.; Yoo, C. G.. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8 (33),12542. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c03533
35	Meng, X.; Wang, Y.; Conte, A. J.; Zhang, S.; Ryu, J.; Wie, J. J.; Pu, Y.; Davison, B. H.; Yoo, C. G.; Ragauskas, A. J.. Bioresour. Technol. 2023, 368, 128280. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128280
36	Wang, Y.; Kim, K. H.; Jeong, K.; Kim, N.-K.; Yoo, C. G.. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2021, 27, 100396. doi: 10.1016/j.cogsc.2020.100396
37	Kim, K. H.; Dutta, T.; Sun, J.; Simmons, B.; Singh, S.. Green Chem. 2018, 20 (4),809. doi: 10.1039/C7GC03029K
38	Huang, C.; Cheng, J.; Zhan, Y.; Liu, X.; Wang, J.; Wang, Y.; Yoo, C. G.; Fang, G.; Meng, X.; Ragauskas, A. J.; et al.. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 362, 127771. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127771
39	Shen, X.; Wen, J.; Mei, Q.; Chen, X.; Sun, D.; Yuan, T.; Sun, R.. Green Chem. 2019, 21 (2),275. doi: 10.1039/C8GC03064B
40	Yu, H.; Xue, Z.; Wang, Y.; Yan, C.; Chen, L.; Mu, T.. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2023, 306, 122688. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122688
41	Su, H.; Yin, J.; Liu, Q.; Li, C.. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2015, 31, 1468.
	宿洪祯, 尹静梅, 刘青山, 李长平. 物理化学学报, 2015, 31, 1468. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201506111
42	Zhou, F.; Shi, R.; Wang, Y.; Xue, Z.; Zhang, B.; Mu, T.. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2022, 24, 16973. doi: 10.1039/D2CP01816K
43	Wang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Yang, J.; Li, M.; Peng, F.; Bian, J.. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 354, 127139. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127139
44	Chen, W.; Xue, Z.; Wang, J.; Jiang, J.; Zhao, X.; Mu, T.. Acta Phys. -Chim. Sin. 2018, 34 (8),904.
	陈文君, 薛智敏, 王晋芳, 蒋静云, 赵新辉, 牟天成. 物理化学学报, 2018, 34 (8),904. doi: 10.3866/PKU.WHXB201712281
45	Ma, Q.; Wang, L.; Zhai, H.; Ren, H.. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 182, 51. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.03.179
46	Zheng, A.; Liu, S.-B.; Deng, F.. Chem. Rev. 2017, 117 (19),12475. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00289
47	Zhou, F.; Shi, R.; Wang, Y.; Xue, Z.; Zhang, B.; Mu, T.. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2022, 24 (28),16973. doi: 10.1039/D2CP01816K
48	Sosa, F.; Bjelic, A.; Coutinho, J.; Costa, M.; Lopes, A.. Sustain. Energy Fuels 2022, 6 (20),4800. doi: 10.1039/D2SE00859A
49	Hong, S.; Shen, X.; Pang, B.; Xue, Z.; Cao, X.; Wen, J.; Yuan, T.. Green Chem. 2020, 22 (6),1851. doi: 10.1039/D0GC00006J

Entry	DES	Molar ratio	AL solubility (%) ^b
1	ChCl: EG	2:1	41.5 (±2.2)
2	ChCl: EG	1:1	42.9 (±2.8)
3	ChCl: BA	1:2	43.5 (±1.7)
4	ChCl: OA	2:1	41.6 (±1.7)
5	Bet: BA	1:2	37.1 (±3.1)
6	Bet: 5-MeOSA	2:1	26.0 (±2.9)
7	Bet: 5-MeOSA	1:1	20.6 (±3.1)
8	L-Carn: BA	1:1	27.3 (±2.5)
9	L-Carn: BA	1:2	34.1 (±2.9)
10	L-Carn: 5-MeOSA	2:1	23.5 (±2.7)
11	L-Carn: 5-MeOSA	1:1	25.1 (±3.7)
12	L-Carn: 5-MeOSA	1:2	33.9 (±3.8)

Entry	DES	lignin	Solubility (%) ^b
1	ChCl: EG(1:1)	DAL	49.4 (±2.5)
2	ChCl: BA(1:2)	EHL	44.4 (±1.5)
3	L-Carn: BA(1:1)	DAL	41.2 (±2.9)
4	L-Carn: BA(1:2)	DAL	44.4 (±2.7)
5	Bet: BA(1:2)	EHL	41.8 (±2.9)
6	L-Carn: BA(1:2)	EHL	41.6 (±2.9)
7	ChCl: EG(2:1)	KL	44.1 (±2.8)
8	ChCl: OA(2:1)	KL	62.0 (±1.9)
9	L-Carn: BA(1:2)	KL	39.2 (±1.8)

Sample	Carboxylic group (mmol∙g⁻¹)	Aliphatic OH (mmol∙g⁻¹)	Phenolic OH (mmol∙g⁻¹)			Ref.
Sample	Carboxylic group (mmol∙g⁻¹)	Aliphatic OH (mmol∙g⁻¹)	Syringyl OH	Guaiacyl OH	p-Hydroxyphenyl OH	Ref.
AL	0.36	1.60	ND^a	1.98	ND ^a	This work
DAL	ND ^a	1.15	ND^a	0.62	ND ^a	40
EHL	0.97	1.18	0.61	0.74	0.58	40

[1]	李若宁, 张雪, 薛娜, 李杰, 吴天昊, 徐榛, 王一帆, 李娜, 唐浩, 侯士敏, 王永锋. Ag(111)表面Ag配位结构的分等级组装[J]. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38(8): 2011060 - .
[2]	曹冲, 张裴, 曹立冬, 刘铭鑫, 宋玉莹, 陈鹏, 黄啟良, 韩布兴. 液滴在超疏水植物叶面的沉积：实验和分子动力学模拟[J]. 物理化学学报, 2022, 38(12): 2207006 - .
[3]	高学庆, 杨树姣, 张伟, 曹睿. 胺和水插层磷酸锰仿生模拟氢键网络用于电催化水氧化[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(7): 2007031 - .
[4]	吴智伟, 丁伟璐, 张雅琴, 王艳磊, 何宏艳. 咪唑类离子液体与酪氨酸相互作用及机理的密度泛函理论研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2021, 37(10): 2002021 - .
[5]	刘小龙, 王强, 王超, 徐君, 邓风. Silicalite-1分子筛氢键诱导晶化机制的固体核磁共振研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(4): 1905035 - .
[6]	李玉红,吴新平,刘聪,王萌,宋本腾,郁桂云,杨刚,侯文华,龚学庆,彭路明. 部分还原二氧化钛的NMR和EPR研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(4): 1905021 - .
[7]	王粉粉, 王芃, 牛洪瑶, 余莹凤, 孙平川. 固体NMR研究PAA/PEO共混物中氢键相互作用与结构演化[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(4): 1912016 - .
[8]	刘璐, 徐玉萍, 陈霞, 洪梅, 佟静. 1-烷基-3-甲基咪唑氯化物焓变的热重分析[J]. 物理化学学报, 2020, 36(11): 2004014 - .
[9]	胡媛媛,王从洋. 双金属促进的均相碳氢键活化反应[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(9): 913 -922 .
[10]	朱月路,赵鑫阳,吴谦,陈颖,赵劲. 多功能氧酰胺导向基在碳氢键活化反应中的研究进展[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(9): 989 -1004 .
[11]	王庆兵,郭政伟,陈弓,何刚. 1, 1'-双(二苯基膦基)二茂铁介导的芳烃碳氢键芳基化反应制备联芳基骨架[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(9): 1021 -1026 .
[12]	潘明光,赵永升,曾小勤,邹建新. 偶氮苯基型离子液体溶液对空气中湿度的变色响应[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(6): 624 -629 .
[13]	陈雯慧,陈胜利. 墨水溶剂对低铂含量质子交换膜燃料电池性能的影响[J]. 物理化学学报, 2019, 35(5): 517 -522 .
[14]	陈文君,薛智敏,王晋芳,蒋静云,赵新辉,牟天成. 低共熔溶剂的热稳定性研究[J]. 物理化学学报, 2018, 34(8): 904 -911 .
[15]	侯玉翠,么聪菲,吴卫泽. 低共熔溶剂：一种应用在混合物分离过程中的绿色溶剂[J]. 物理化学学报, 2018, 34(8): 873 -885 .

生物质基酸性低共熔溶剂用于高效溶解木质素及溶解机理

Biomass-based Acidic Deep Eutectic Solvents for Efficient Dissolution of Lignin: Towards Performance and Mechanism Elucidation

RichHTML

PDF

赞

补充材料

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 49

相关文章 15

Metrics

推荐阅读 0