Combined alkali and hydrothermal pretreatments for oat straw valorization within a biorefinery concept

The aim of this work was the evaluation of lime pretreatment combined or not with previous step of autohydrolysis for oat straw valorization. Under selected conditions of lime pretreatment, 96% of glucan and 77% of xylan were recovered and 42% of delignification was achieved. Xylose fermentation to ethanol by metabolic engineered Saccharomyces cerevisiae (MEC1133) strain improved the ethanol production by 22% achieving 41 g/L. Alternatively, first step of autohydrolysis (S0=4.22) allowed a high oligosaccharides recovery (68%) and subsequent lime pretreatment attained a 57% of delignification and 99% of glucan to glucose conversion. Oat straw processed by autohydrolysis and lime pretreatment reached the maximal ethanol concentration (50 g/L). Both strategies led to oat straw valorization into bioethanol, oligosaccharides and lignin indicating that these pretreatments are adequate as a first stage within an oat straw biorefinery.The authors thank the financial support from the Strategic Project of UID/BIO/04469/2013 CEB Unit (Funding agency for Science and Technology, FCT, Portugal) and for the Project CTQ2012-30855 of the Spanish "Ministry of Science and Innovation", partially funded by the FEDER program of the European Union. A Romani thanks her post-doctoral grant funded by Xunta of Galicia (Plan I2C, 2014)

Implementation of the short-term assessment of risk and treatability over two phases

Background: Over the last decade, the Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START) has provided a strong evidence base to predict a range of problem behaviors. The implementation of START and adaptation of the services to the use of START have so far been sparsely described in the literature. The purpose of this study was to describe the continuation and the interdisciplinarity of risk assessments through the two phases. Methods: Over a period of 10 years, the forensic mental health services at Brøset has implemented START in two phases: initially with implementing the instrument (2005–2009) and secondarily by customizing the instrument to everyday treatment and planning (since 2009). This implementation was based on data from 887 START assessments for 181 patients over a decade (2005–2015). Results: The results showed that the number of START assessments has been stable throughout the past 10 years and the interval between the ratings has decreased significantly (p<0.05). The involvement by diversity of professionals has increased significantly over the two implementation phases. Conclusion: This study also addressed the continuity and organization of the implementation process and presented an overview of how START has been widespread in the service through treatment. The results showed an increased multidisciplinary participation and a continuing rate of assessments as the implementation progressed from assessment to a combined assessment–treatment phase