Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T03:11:07.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The determination of lignin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. W. Czerkawski
J. W. Czerkawski
Affiliation:
Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The methods for estimating lignin based on 72% sulphuric acid are lengthy and usually require large corrections for the residual nitrogenous impurities. The steps used in the initial purification of lignin, and particularly those concerned with the removal of nitrogenous impurities using proteolytic enzymes, have been investigated.

2. The conditions that remove the maximum amount of nitrogen were investigated. The nitrogenous material remaining in the lignin isolated by the adopted procedure was partly characterized, and it was shown that about half of the resistant N could be obtained in the form of amino acids which were presumably present in the lignin in the form of protein. The amino acid compositions of the resistant nitrogenous material in lignin derived from grass, and in lignin derived from faeces of sheep, when the same grass was given, were compared. They were found to be sufficiently similar to suggest a common origin.

3. A modified procedure is proposed and described in detail; it is suitable for routine work.

4. Comparisons were made between the results obtained by determining lignin in forage and faeces samples by the method now presented and those obtained by the method used previously.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , May 1967 , pp. 325 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1967

References

Armitage, E. R., Ashworth, R. de B. & Ferguson, W. S. (1948). J. Soc. chem. Ind., Lond. 67, 241.Google Scholar
Bondi, A. & Meyer, H. (1948). Biochem. J. 43, 248.Google Scholar
Crampton, E. W. & Maynard, L. A. (1938). J. Nutr. 15, 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czerkawski, J. W. (1965). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 24, xviii.Google Scholar
Ellis, G. H., Matrone, G. & Maynard, L. A. (1946). J. Anim. Sci. 5, 285.Google Scholar
Fischer, H. (1961). K. LantbrHögsk Annlr 27, 465.Google Scholar
Freudenberg, K. (1965). Science, N.Y. 148, 595.Google Scholar
Hall, D. A. & Czerkawski, J. W. (1961). Biochem.J. 80, 128.Google Scholar
Moon, F. E. & Abou-Raya, A. K. (1952 a). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 3, 399.Google Scholar
Moon, F. E. & Abou-Raya, A. K. (1952 b). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 3, 407.Google Scholar
Moore, S. & Stein, W. H. (1948). J. biol. Chem. 176, 367.Google Scholar
Sowden, F. J. & DeLong, W. A. (1949). Scient. Agric. 29, 409.Google Scholar
Sullivan, J. T. (1959). J. Anim. Sci. 18, 2192.Google Scholar
Thomas, B. & Armstrong, D. G. (1949). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 39, 335.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., Czerkawski, J. W. & Blaxter, K. L. (1966). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 25, xviii.Google Scholar
Waite, R., Johnston, M. J. & Armstrong, D. G. (1964). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 62, 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, D. L. & Quicke, G. V. (1964). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 15, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar