CHEMISTRY OF WOO D
V. The Results of Analysis of Some
American Wood s
022
No. 8849
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVIC E
FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATOR Y
Madison 5, Wisconsi n
In Cooperation with the University of Wisconsin
p
L ,D0
CIDJMISTRY OF WOO D
V.
The Results of Analysis of Some American Woods l
By
C . J . RITTER, Chemis t
and
L . C . FLECK, Associate Chemis t
American forests are rapidly becoming depleted of certain specie s
of woods : The industries using these particular species are turning wit h
increased interest to the use of other woods with similar physical an d
chemical properties . 'Where such similar essential characteristics occu r
in two or more woods, it is possible in many cases to substitute one fo r
the other . In considering different woods for the same use, certai n
properties might be classified as primary and others as secondary . If
'the primary properties are satisfactory, an d. the secondary are not, i t
may be possible by variou s . treatments to . render the woods suitable fo r
the required purpose . This=is strikingly illustrated in the paper indus try in which some woods are given the soda treatment, some the sulphat e
treatment, and still others the sulphite process treatment in order t o
obtain pulp for paper .
If data were available on the chemical composition of more of
the important American woods, it is believed that the wood-using indus tries could in some cases use woods in new processes, and in other in stances utilize woods now considered of little value . With this in min d
further work was done at the Forest Products Laboratory on the study o f
the chemical composition of some American woods, a project which s begun
by A . W. Schorger- and continued by S . A . Mahood and D . E . Cable .
Experimental
In selecting . the woods for this comparative analysis an attemp t
was made to take some of the more useful woods which would at the sam e
time confirm or disapprove the general belief (1) that there is a relatio n
between the density and the ligno-cellulose content of wood, and (2) tha t
there is a relation between the susceptibility to decay and the cellulos e
1Published in Jour . Indus . & Eng . Chem ., Nov . 1922 .
?Ibid ., Vol . 9, Na . 6, 1917 .
Vol .
.Vol 12, No . 9, 1920 ; Vol . 14, 1922 .
RS49
content of different species . With these two seemingly possible condi tions in mind, woods with extremely high densities, such as hickory ,
others with extremely low densities, such as balsa, and some wit h
intermediate specific gravity were selected . These woods are as follows :
Where obtaine d
Specie s
ponderosa pin e
(Pinus ponderosa)
Coconino County, Arizon a
Yellow ceda r
(Chamaecyparis nootkatensis )
Sinohomish County, Washingto n
Incense ceda r
(Libocedrus decurrens ))
Fresno County, Californi a
Tanbark oak
(Quercus densiflora) '
Trinity County, Californi a
Redwood (heartwood )
(Sequoia sempervirens )
Shipment from Pacific Lumbe r
Co ., California
Mesquit e
(Prosopis juliflora )
Shipment from Board of Commis , sioners of Agriculture an d
Forestry, Div. of Forestry ,
Honolulu, Hawai i
Bal s a
(Ochroma lagopus)
Shipment from American Bals a
Co ., New Yor k
Shellbark hickory
(Hicoria ovata )
Harrisonburg County, Virgini a
The results obtained from the analysis of the eight woods ar e
given in Table 1 . In the analytical work, which followed the method s
described by the former investigators, all samples except incense ceda r
and mesquite were run in duplicate . The results tabulated are the averag e
of the two determinations . The data relative to redwood are not exactl y
comparable with the results obtained on the other species shown in Tabl e
1, as the sapwood showed decay, and the heartwood only could be analyzed .
Discussion of Result s
Ash Content
The ash in the hardwoods runs considerably higher than in th e
conifers . Balsa, which weighs about 7 pounds per cubic foot, has an un usually high ash content as compared with the other species listed in th e
table . Estimated on a ton basis, balsa would be a good source for potash ,
provided its ash is high in potassium . Measured on a cord basis, however ,
the yield of potash is lower than in other hardwoods .
R849
-2-
0
MA
43 A
0
0
.
.1
1
.
00, 0410
0 44 . -2 :12 .
I
H
F-10 N
*
404 4
74 NI 7 ,
CJ
4101V
4
0•4'*.
1.
**I : A
3 10 A
40 AI 02 01
w4-141
0 I
.
*
. . .
1
10 Al o
4 *I 0-7'*
9 ''.'18c"72'22 ' 4 '
..
0
'
0
0 '0'
00o -4-4
I
1
01 4', .114
10 4 0 13.
I 40 .0 Cs -
1
"7: t--4 4
2.20'4-1
1AA
14
,o
q
re
l
AIA 4
.
.
C4 4A 40
4 4
g
.44*'O'E'
,
0
4
44
143
A
0c3
•
I
I
"
•
q
.-4
'a SS'
.
0 o
40.1 N0
4
N
.-L 4
r.-
-' . .1 49
04
0%1
Al 4 : 1 A 0,1044
44,-1 0
-A*4* 410
. . .se
44
4
474A
4 444 4 4;
04 4 4
A A tt1I
1
n
11 1 1
I
0-411 4
In
.--IAI
•
•
A
.1 P
.
4 A
A n
ko
'10 4 m r
7
4
.•f 1
..
4
*
4W 4 -C
i
44
■rl
ct
m 4 74A CV 0
:' . : :.43 '-I•0
)
.
W 4.2 44r]
Ar 0
40 44044
.T,;.A!ri
-I
CI
N
p.
0 * 0 Al 4 1 2
Al A ..dut y
4
04 m
•
Al
C .} .* HI
..
.
.74
Al 4. , O
.. .
41
31 A14M t.01 '0 :4
404 4
A N A[.
72 0•
2''
%t r '.
4
'7
th'?2
4 . .
I1pp
I
. .,,"
4.1
mv- .mm
0, t.- C
t-
1 ;,S-A .t
m4t-b
A A
440
4A40
':''-''.
m
.
1q7
MG .
moto .4
t41,
0
ni
nm
AI
IACOM4
L.
. 01 72
=IA 'IJ
.4.
-:'.
M. q l
C1 C7
4 .14
Y19
,k7-
r•.i
A 72
,W
2
. . -2. ' .
..
C 4 02 1 '• 4 2 4 4 , 20 IA 4 4 P 4 4 4-- 07 411 ,4-.. LO c IA A. 71 .0
. ..A- A
.o
A;
4A t- •
40 71
- 2 * LLLLL' t4
.
.
47 A- 17 40
* 44 VI *
40
4 40 AG:
0. 4 4714
444'
4044400
44400
4*W
Vd'
144440
0" .41 M .AM =4 -1 4 4
[
0
.
A g
o
M +7
L
W*AN
:0 A: A
*
A A A
AAA A
m 40 a, A
. . .
422 44 M
C 1 01 M ,j
1 4 •0 A, 4 A 3 CI
1
. 4 .0
13
.a 0j.
.
o
o
.
4.*
40
.-2
-3. 0
.4
+>
o
o ,.3
.
HH
M,
A
4.10 4 A-
'M-A',2
.0 1:0 A
NO .7 .1
*C,440
2-10
0,
•
.
. .
.
•
I- P- 00 .44 -, *4447 t! t:'
WNHAA-l H .-I•-4*t* HA'
A
.
4. 0 Ida
..t
. .
.+ .i Al
0444t.-
. . .
40 4 4
>r. >a
'eg 'O''g
▪ . .
.n
2: 2
A- AL 4
mcam
4
.
A.
9
1 'p 1C d~y~y7 I
. . .
..Al
,
M4044
04WW
I t-omm
Ot4 ,Dv4m IIt9
01
M4 ; 4 :•2•0e
q
W401el
N
m
. . . .
N44t:
8 :1
t-04t
44
- 4
., ;
H
o 4
.7417•
.Mk MAWA ,44AV 44A* AO
I 0 I
444 AI 40 .A* 47 4 Pw
4 *
.
.
4 404 6
.
.
.
100
ArINNW44'4 .0r AA
.. ..' ..
.
C.j
0
t-I 4 : 2
1'7 1,5 .a
•
. .??9
.
. .
.4
4
40404
0.911
4 4 047
CJtp
'''-.
4 0
HAI
m‘0- A u
44 .0
44 0 L4 40
404A6 440 0 N
40P-44
AM= 45 M
•
A CI 1
.
440
. . .
4el
.4 72 4'2
. -8
S'
. . p
%'I.'.:'a :l ,l
.4
''T,?
MMM.
.
. .
10,0
' ' :? g g
!4',7..t
L
I
. . . ?
mooe-
'4'S'O'
. . T
. .
* 47 4 474
no 74
04 74 .2 rl
M
...''
„-■
.0 .44W
040 4
cO o,
..4
4 A.0
8
n!-It
RAF;
%!',
2 .'' o'
. .
0000 NiWw HA 0 0
4mN4,
A Ot0,003 N $0
*
.
44444 44444
r-IAIAIAI H
01 4
.143[41
.
Mv .440
mb- m rs nl Cl {y 4AN A
Pb`
44 N 1}1
.4
A40 M
'''I'''
.
U _-a
00 0000
.-I M
47 A
.
117 Y7
.41r
*
0:11'7
42
4 0 C74PW 4 4
471 4 ;
=
. .
4
WYINI
A .-I
A CO
4. .
4 C)CL, QE 40 4
A
100 4
.
.
040 WN
4 *
4t-.
.1
00
1
▪
▪
▪
m2T .'74.,
mm2 :54
:°a
•
*
.
.
M 4*444 *440 .0p' 4a,0
Llae0444 444 4 .1,4
:4T:A
*11
* 4;40= =4 47404
.. A . . .. A A A
Et.
T
Aiel s
.* .. A A AA . . A
;i
ya
;!
,i .
.d a d
: 'i'°'
,._,
0 03k '1r
1Oc
*0
A .&
47
5
E4
.1
gAl
E'2
-'
I*
'e't':E P- g E
▪
k
.i .it
'2
0* ;-•Ir4r,
A
EL
4 kg.,
!I
H
s:
A
A.
IAA
A
* 12
A,
•
..i S .-.
* 4
.30
HAI
:74 .* A A .. A
.--F
g■
4:6
2
t7.'' g
05
A
%1-1
0
O
k
9 .4
-I 1 2
iij
00 .
A--
2 .,,i;
.
r '2
1i
Cold-Water Soluble Conten t
The outstanding features of the cold water solubility deter minations are shown in connection with mesquite and balsa . The forme r
has an exceptionally high cold-water soluble content, due to the mesquit e
gum . The latter has a low cold-water soluble content because it contain s
very little tannin or gum . . The redwood runs fairly high in water solubl e
material, undoubtedly because of the large amount of tannin .
Hot-rater Soluble Conten t
The hot-water soluble content is from approximately 1 to 2 . 5
percent higher than the cold-water soluble content . The products dis solved by water are principally tannins and carbohydrates ,
Ether Soluble Content
The general idea prevails that the ether soluble content i s
higher in conifers than in the hardwoods . Exceptions, however, are red wood among the conifers and mesquite and balsa among the hardwoods . As
would be expected, ponderosa pine has the highest ether extract in thi s
series of woods .
One Percent NaOH Soluble Conten t
The alkali soluble extract consists primarily of tannins ,
resin acids, and carbohydrates with slight traces of cellulose and lignin .
The alkali soluble material in ponderosa pine and redwood averages abov e
that of the other conifers . This is due to the high resin content o f
the former and the large percentage of tannin of the latter . Tanbark
oak and mesquite among the hardwoods show a high percentage of alkal i
soluble material .
Methoxy Conten t
It will be noted that on the average the softwoods run slightly
lower in methoxy content than the hardwoods, The one exception is incens e
cedar, which, on account of its exceedingly high methoxy content, migh t
be expected to compare favorably with hardwoods for the production o f
methyl alcohol by destructive distillation, It has been found, however ,
that the conifers as a rule produce scarcely 30 percent as much methy l
alcohol as the hardwoods, even though their methoxy content is about g5
Percent of that in the broad-leaved species . Consequently, a` ieryf'poor ._
yield of methyl alcohol from incense cedar is not surprising . The abov e
chemical constants are discussed more fully in connection with aceti c
acid content, as shosn in Table 2 .
R849
a3-
Table 2 .--Percentages of acetic acid, met,oxp, and, methyl alcohol i n
various wood s
Specie s
Methoxy and methyl alcoho l
Acetic acid
----------------- - -------------------------------- Acid
:Destructive : yeisel method : Destructiv e
; distillation
:hydrolysis :distillation :
,for .
: for methyl
methoxy
alcohol
Birch
:
Maple
'
:
Tanbark oak . . . . :
Hickory
Redwood :
Incense cedar . . :
. 0
4.46
5 .23
2 .51.
1 .08
.91
16 .80
15 .26
1
6 .89
-5 .05
6.07
7 .25
5 .711
5.63
5 .21
6 .2 4
.
11 .54
11 .7 6
1 1 .72
22 .08
1
-U. S . Dept . of Agr . Bulletin 508 .
-T. S . Dept . of Agr . Bulletin 129 .
A. higher yield of acetic acid is obtained in all cases by des--- ,
tructive distillation than,by acid hydrolysis . The reverse is true i n
regard to methoxy and methyl alcohol .
Pentosan Conten t
As in acetic acid content, there is also a marked difference i n
the percentage of pentosans, presumably xylan and araban, in the softwood s
and hardwoods . The analyses of the eight species examined show that th e
pentosan content of coniferous woods is about 50'percent of that found in _
broad-leaved species . The average for the former is 8 .- percent, for the
latter 17 .5 percent .
Methyl Pentosan Conten t
The percentage of methyl pehtosans'is considerably higher in
softwoods than in hardwoods, Tanbark' oak is the only one of
the .
species which contains no methyl pentosans, The quantity of pentosan s
and methyl pentosans obt fined confirm the conclusions of Schorger 2
and of Mahood and Cable . 2
Cellulose Conten t
No marked difference in the cellulose content of hardwoods and
.
softwoods appears to exist in the eight species analyzed . Of the hardwood
R849
mesquite is low in cellulose and of the softwoods, incense cedar an d
redwood have a low percentage of cellulose when compared with ponderos a
pine and yellow cedar . Cellulose was prepared according to the direc tions outlined in the Journal of Industrial & Engineering Chemistry ,
Vol . 9, 1917, p . 556, and is the residue left after the alternat e
chlorination and sodium sulphite extraction had been carried out unti l
the sodium sulphite filtrate remained colorless .
That the cellulose thus obtained differs in individual specie s
is apparent from the pentosan content of the cellulose from the various
woods .
Calculated on the oven-dry weight of the wood, the cellulose i solated from the softwoods is from 4 .5 to 5 .0 percent higher than th e
pentosan free cellulose ; in the hardwoods it is from 8 .5 to 13 .3 percent
higher . This is considering the pentosans and methyl pentosans collec tively . If it were possible to extract the pentosans and nothing mor e
from cellulose of various woods obtained by the Cross and Bevan method ,
one might argue that the residual material should be the same . How suc h
a separation can be accomplished cannot be answered by consulting ou r
present methods of analysis . Even if a clean-cut separation of th e
pentosans from the rest of the cellulose were made, the remaining resi dues from the various woods seem to differ in some respects . This ca n
be illustrated by using some of the data in Table 1 to obtain a differen t
relationshi-D as shown in Table 3 . Column 2 shows the percent of pentosan s
which resist the treatment for determining cellulose . The hardwood cellu lose contains a much higher percent of pentosans than the softwood cellu lose . It was thought that a complete extraction of these bodies from th e
cellulose could be accomplished by using 17 .5 percent NaOH as is done i n
separating alpha from beta and gamma cellulose . If the figures in column
4 are subtracted from the corresponding numbers in column 1, the values o f
beta and gamma cellulose in the various woods are obtained. In othe r
words, the results in column 5 represent the percent of material extracte d
from cellulose with 17 .5 percent NaOH . Now, if the pentosans exist a s
such in the cellulose, one would expect a complete extraction of suc h
bodies with 17 .5 percent NaOH, especially when it is noted that a larg e
amount of hexosans is also dissolved with the treatment . In column 6 i s
found the percent of hexosans extracted over and above the percent O f
pentosans present . On this basis, the percents of hexosans dissolved i n
the first four woods agree favorably . In the tanbark oak also the amoun t
of hexosans extracted is high . In the remaining five species the percen t
of extract in excess of the pentosans present is low compared with th e
species mentioned above .
To determine whether all the pentosans are removed from th e
remaining cellulose by a 17 .5 percent NaOH treatment, samples of alph a
cellulose of ponderosa pine, western white pine, tanbark oak, mesquite ,
balsa and some purified cotton cellulose were subjected to the regula r
pentosan determination . The results given in column 7 were obtained .
Calculating these results on the oven-dry basis of the original woo d
as indicated in column 8, and comparing these figures with th e
R849
-5_
Table 3 .--Distributionofpentosans
Results
Species
in
percentages of oven-dry weight
:Cellu- :Cellu- :Pento- :Alpha :Beta + :Hexosans
lose : lose : san :cellu- : gamma : in beta
: in :pento- : free : lose :cellu- : + gamma
: wood : sans :cellu- : in : lose : celluin
lose : wood : in : lose
wood :
in
.
wood :
: wood :
of
wood
:Pento- :,alpha :Cellulos e
: sans :cellu- :pentosans
: in : lose :retaine d
:alpha :pento- :in alpha
:cellu . : sans :cellulos e
: lose .
.
: won
: 57 .41 :
5 .06, 52 .35 : 35 .65 : 21 .76 :
16,70
. 1 .82 . 0 .65 :
12 . 4
Western
. 59 .71 :
white pine :
4.34 : 55 .37 : 38 .57 : 21 .14 :
16 .80
. 2 .05
.79 .
18 . 2
Yellow
cedar
. 53 .86 :
4 .89 : 48 .97 : 33 . 76 : 20 .10 :
15 .21
.
Incense
. 41 .60 :
4 .60 : 37 .00 : 19 .52 : 22 .08 :
17 .48
.
Redwood
: 48 .45 :
4 .60 : 43 .85 : 38 .10 : 10 .35 :
5 .75
:
55 .03 : 13 .24 : 44 .79 : 32 .94 : 25 .09 ;
11 .85
: 9 .51 . 3 .13 .
23 . 6
Ponderosa
pine
cedar
Tanbark
oak :
Eucalyptus : 57 .62
•
13 .49 : 44 .13 : 39 .66 : 17 .96 :
4,47
.
9 .87 :
1 .39
: 3 .45 . 1 .24 .
; 2 .63 .
Mesquite
. 45 :45 :
Balsa
.
54 .15 : 11 .56 : 42 .59 : 40 .96 : 13 .19 :
1 .63
Hickory
: 56 .22 : 13 .10 ; 43 .12 ; 42 .92 : 13 .30 :
.20
:
:
5 .48 : 37 .00 : 35 .61 :
:
:
.
:
Cotton (purified cellulose) percent pentosan found
1 .07
.
14 . 6
9. 2
.
: ---•
1 .03
'I--
corresponding ones in column 2, one may see that a considerable part o f
the pentosans found in the original wood is still retained in the alph a
cellulose . This is shown on a percentage basis in column 9 of Table 3 .
From these figures it is apparent that the alpha cellulose isolated fro m
the various sources is not the same chemically as is claimed by some in vestigators who have worked with too limited a number of samples .
It is realized that some will argue that the furfural found b y
distilling the alpha cellulose with 12 percent MI, might have been due 4
to a breaking down of some hexoses formed by hydrolysis . It is claimedthat such sugars produce small amounts of furfural under the above con ditions . According to the above reference, the percent of furfural avail able from such a source is considerably lower than the figures of thi s
table show .
Another source of furfural may be oxycellulose .- It is possibl e
that some of this form of cellulose may be present when preparing the mate rial according to the Cross and Bevan method . If the furfural found when
working with alpha cellulose in this research came from oxycellulose, the n
it should be possible to hydrolyze the alpha cellulose to a hexos e
quantitatively . If, however, the furfural came from pentosans presen t
in the alpha cellulose, then it should be possible to identify som e
pentose derivatives after hydrolyzing the alpha cellulose with acid . Thi s
work will be done later .
From the data presented in this paper it appears as though th e
celluloses prepared from the different sources are not identical . It is ,
perhaps, possible to reduce two or more of them to the same stable nucleu s
by alternate alkali and acid treatments . Nether this should be done o r
not depends upon just how cellulose should be defined . To the writer i t
seems that such a reduction is carrying the treatment to an extreme . By
such a process it is possible to reduce two or more definite individual
compounds to the same nucleus . For instance, benzoic acid and phthali c
acid on treatment with lime produce benzene . Methyl benzene and ethyl
benzene on oxidation give benzoic acid . In like manner it might b e
possible to change two or more definite kinds of cellulose to the sam e
stable complex . The pentosans which withstand the vigorous treatmen t
to which they are subjected in the Cross and Bevan process must withou t
a doubt be closely bound with the cellulose molecule if not really in corporated in it . If one refers to the work of Johnsen and Hovey- i n
which they discuss the relative merits of the original and modifie d
methods of Cross and Bevan for preparing cellulose, he will see tha t
their work confirms *hat has been found by the writer . On page 44 o f
their report is found the following data :
-Brow e, Handbook of Sugar Analysis, p . 453 •
-Browne, Handbook of Sugar Analysis, p . 376 .
6
-paper, vol . 21, No . 23 (1917..13), p . 36 .
R49
-7-
Table 4.--Comparison of cellulose obtained in Cross and Bevan's origina l
and modified method s
Cellulose
percent
Species
: Original
method
Furfural in cellulos e
percent
.
Modified , Original
method
method
Modifie d
metho d
Balsam fir
54 .45
51 .50
5. 43
4.3 9
Aspen
60 .95
57 . 25
11 .88
10 .16
By recalculation and rearrangement of this data, the followin g
results are obtained :
Table 5 .--Furfural and pentosans of original wood in the cellulose pre . Percentage s
p ared by the two methods of Cross and Bevan
are based on weight of the original wood .
Species
: Original : Modified : Loss in : Loss in : Loss : Los s
: method : method : cellu- :
fur- : in
in
:
lose . fural :pento- : hexo : sans : sans
Balsam fir
54 .45
.
51,50
,
2 .95
.
0.63
:
0 .98 :
1 .97
Aspen
60 .95
.
57 .25
.
3 .70
.
1 .43
.
2 .23 :
1 .47
If the furfural in column 4 comes from pentosans, then the figure s
in column 5 indicate the amount of pentosans extracted . By subtracting th e
data in column 5-from the corresponding items in column 3, the substance s
other than pentosans (hexosans) are indicated . In each case there is a
considerable amount of such substances removed from the cellulose . Until
a uniform method of isolating cellulose is decided upon, the materia l
which different investigators prepare from the same source will undoubtedl y
have varying characteristics, when subjected to chemical tests . If such a
complex substance as cellulose prepared by a uniform method from differen t
sources is not identical, there ought not be any cause for concern, for i t
might be possible that more than one kind of the substance does exist .
R849
_g_
Lignin Conten t
There is no marked distinction in the lignin content of hardwood s
and softwoods . If ponderosa pine and mesquite are eliminated from the eigh t
species analyzed it then appears as though, on the average, that the soft woods have a higher lignin content than the hardwoods . However, a large r
number of species must be analyzed before a definite conclusion can b e
drawn .
Contrary to some experimental data, it is quite generall y
accepted that the methoxy group is entirely associated with the lignin .
If this were the case, either of the following conditions should obtain :
(1) The lignin content should be proportional to the methoxy content i n
the various species, or (2) the composition of the lignin in differen t
species must vary .
A. case in which the total methoxy content of the wood is recovere d
from the isolated lignin is found in a paper by Dore' on "The Distributio n
of Certain Chemical Constants of Wood over Its Proximate Constituents . ' + In
this paper it was found that the methoxy content of redwood is 5 .60 percent .
By determining the methoxy content of the redwood ligroin, Dore was able t o
recover the entire methoxy found in the original wood .
In another paper by the same author ! on 'The Approximate Analysi s
of Hardwoods," is found some data which show that in live oak the methox y
is only partially associated with the lignin . The mother; content of th o
original oven-dry live oak was found to be 5 .80 percent . Of this amoun t
3 . 72 percent was associated with the live oak lignin . The remaining 2 .08
percent methoxy was found-to be otherwise associated or at most loosel y
associated with the lignin . This, then, is an example in which more than
1/3 of the total methoxy content of the original wood is not . found in the
isolated lignin . That the methoxy is not entirely associated with th e
lignin in hardwoods and firmly bound to the lignin in softwoods seems t o
be shown by the above example . Whether this condition is true of hardwoods and softwoods generally is a study which will be taken up at th e
Forest Products Laboratory in the future . As is shown in Table 1 th e
methoxy content is not proportional to lignin . The proportion betwee n
the two chemical constants does not even hold in a series of woods be longing to either the hardwood or softwood classes .
It is of interest to use the data on redwood and live oak an d
calculate the methoxy content of the redwood and live oak lignins . Fol lowing are the results :
Jour . Indus . & Eng . Chemistry, May 1920, p . 475 .
Oct . 1920, p . 9g6 .
R849
Table 6 .--Distribution of methoxy group based upon the oven-dry weigh t
of wood
Species
CH3O conten t
: CH3 O content : CH,O content : Lignin conof
oven• oven-dry wood ' tent of oven- '
wood . '
in lignin
dry wood
ligni n
percen t
percent
percent
percen t
Redwood
Live oak
'6 .25
6 .28
34.5
18 .17
5 .80
3 .7 2
21 .14
1 7.59
From the above table it appears that the composition of lignin i n
the two species is quite uniform from the standpoint of methoxy content .
If this uniformity of the methoxy content of lignin holds in all woods ,
then the methoxy no t . assooiated with the lignin must vary . This is anothe r
project which will be . investigated in . connection with percent . of total
'methoxy associated with the lignin, t o' which reference was made above .
It is an experimental fact that softwoods do not react the sam e
as hardwoods from the stondpoint . of methyl alcohol yield,,when subjecte d
to destructive distillation . ,If the softwoods have all of the methoxy
associated with the lignin, and the hardwoods only partially, as the very
limitea amount of data show, it may explain why t ;re,broad-leaved specie s
give higher yields of *ood alcohol . It is possible that .the methoxy not
combined with lignin is more easily obtained as methyl alcohol than th e
methoxy associated with lignin . Under such conditions, the greater shar e
of methyl :alcohol in hardwoods' would be- derived from methoxy not associate d:
with the lignin .' In softwoods it would originate from the lignin methox y
entirely .
Pentosans and Methyl Pentosans in .Cellulose
Approximately 50 percent of the pentosans and methyl pentosan s
of the original wood are retained in the cellulose. The hardwood Cellulos e
is higher•in pentosans, and lower in methyl pentosans, than softwood cell o
lose .' The relationship between these pentose-producing bodies in th e
hardwood and softwood cellulosde is very simi] .ar'to that found in the
original species .
Alpha, Beta,
and Gamma Cellulos e
This determination is of interest to the manufacturers of sod a
and sulphate pulps and cellulose derivatives, who wish a high yield o f
stable or alpha cellulose .
R849
-10 -
The conifers have a higher gamma cellulose content than th e
deciduous class .
Density andLigno-Cellulose Conten t
Hickory, one of the extremely dense woods, has a ligno-cellulos e
content of 79 .66 percent, Yellow cedar and ponderosa pine, two light woods ,
have a ligno-cellulose content of S5 .1S and. &4 .o6 percent, respectively .
Balsa, which weighs about 7 pounds per cubic foot, has a ligno-cellulos e
content of S0 .65 percent . Thus, it appears that no direct relationshi p
exists between density and the ligno-cellulose content of woods . Th e
density seems to depend upon the structure, that is, the compactness o f
the cells and the quantity of incrustaceous material, .
Cellulose Content and Resistance to Decay
Balsa, on account of its extreme lightness, is used in the manu facture of life-saving apparatus and insulating material . The wood must b e
treated chemically to protect it against water soaking and decay . Its extreme susceptibility to decay is claimed to be due to a very high cellulos e
content . The results found in its analysis show that the cellulose conten t
of balsa is not above the average of other woods . Therefore, the ease wit h
which balsa decays seems to be due to some other specific property .
AnalysesofWood s
Table 7 includes the data on the species referred to in thi s
report as well as that previously published by the Forest Products Labora tory on the comparative chemical composition of woods . The results ar e
derived from the three sources indicated in the footnotes .
By consulting the directions of Schorger and Mahood for preparin g
the wood sample for determining cellulose, it will be noted that a chang e
was made by the latter . The directions of Mahood were followed in th e
cellulose determinations given in this paper .
Summary
Hardwoods show a higher acetic acid content than softwoods by
the acid hydrolysis process .
Hardwoods average about 100 percent higher in pentosan content
than softwoods .
Softwoods have a higher methyl pentosan content than hardwoods .
RS49
-11-
The methoxy content of softwoods is appro±imately S5 percen t
of that found in hardwoods .
' The cellulose isolated from the different species varies i n
furfural-producing substances . Cellulose retains about 50 percent o f
the furfural-yielding bodies in the original wood .
. Beta cellulose content
is
higher in softwoods than in hardwoods .
Apparently the acetic acid content obtained by aci d .hydrolysi s
is lower than that obtained by destructive' distillation .
'
are given .
The analyses of eigh t - species of woods not previously determine d
'
1
P.
R&49
-12-
Table 7 - Analysis Of woods .
Results in percentage of oven-dry
226aulll :,
tSample :M012ture : Aeh:
:
: 001d ; Hot ;
: 1;
;wate2 :water :2t2er:220H
t
22t
:
:
6642ies
-------------------------- -
iestern yellow pine
(sinus ponderosa)
141
142
143
144
161
162
163
164
Yellow cedar
(Chameecyparia
nootkatensis)
I Mean
% 166
166
: 167
g Mean
Incense cedar
(1222eedrus
deco-yens)
Redwood (heartwood)
(Sequoia sempervirens)
(22222n white pine
(Pimu2montlaola)
'
168
t 168
; Mean
3
1
g
2
3
t
4
$ Mean
1
t
11
12
13
20
Mean
Longleaf pine
(sinus 2alu2222s)
t
Douglas fir'
(Pseudot2u8a
taxii'0112)
1
2
3
5
1
Lean
1estern larch'
(Larix oce2dentalis)
1
1
,
3
4
Mean
.bite 2p-222e
(Pi cos canadensis)
22nt(22k oak
(2222612 dens'flora)
1'22guite
(Prosopis Juliflora)
1
2
3
1
4
Mean
151
; 152
; 153
; 164
t Mean
:
171
: 172
175
t 174
Mean
Balsa
(0222o2a Iagopus}
Hickory (shellbark )
(2leoria ovate )
22calyptus (2uoalyptus 21222145)
6a2220oe 121122 4422I02na)
I
176
175
Mean
Sugar maple (Ate r
22222at:un)
2 . .22d .
' Jr . Ind .
177
9 .60
0 .65 : 4 .71 : 5 .41 : 0 .65 :18 .66 : 2 .60 : 5 .61 :18 .58
0 .92
178 : 7 .39 ;0 .74 ; 4 .86 : 5 .73 : 0 .62 :19 .64 : 2 .42 : 5 .65 :19 .06 : 0 .67
Mean : --B7695- :21621 -r;7H:357 ;=65 :121'041" GBI : 5 - 23:72722-s -ralir:
0 .23 ; 2 .65 : 2 .41 ; 0 .64 :16 .571 2 .31 : 7 .11 :21 .41
1 • 6 .99
1 .97
2
2 : 6 .55
0 .20 : 4 .93 ; 6 .96 : 0 .62 :18 .42) 1 .971 6 .37 ;20 .66 : 2 .14 :
3
6 .87 :0 .27 : 5 .31 ; 0 .26 : 0 .60 :17 .40 ; 1 .51 : 6 .87117 .90 : 2 .74 1
t
4
5 .90 :0 .24 : 5 .79 ;8 .271 0 .59 :21 .*0 : 1 .62 : 6 .56 :20 .39 ; 2 .48 :
1 Mean
6 .28
1
1
2
3
4
5
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
1
2
3
4
t Mean
:
:
i
:
:
:
:
1
1
1
1
2
5
4
Mean
Eng . Chem . Vol . 12 .
Tng . :hen . Vol . `: :
Trouble filtering
zMUS41 V
0
:0
;0
;0
:0
()JO
t
s Mean :
Y211o, 21reh (5atula'
lutes )
In celluloe e
:10a22IM225- :Pento- ;M22hyl ;Celln- :12gnin :2
: le : Day : San :panto- : lose ;
;Pento- :Metbyl :21pha :Beta : Cana
:aoid ;
: eau ;
ean :panto- :eelln- :cells- :oellnl De e
t son : loss
los e
;----. :
:
:
t
.43; 5 .58 : 6 .671 9 .63 :22 .08 ; 0 .92 •: 4 .55 ; 5 .06
1 .68
56 .22 :26 .72
9 .50
2 .13 69 :18
30 .82
.42 : 2 .97 ; 3 .40 ; 6 .52 :16 .58 : 1 .24 : 4 .02 : 9 .96 : 1 .24 : 57 .72 ;25 .85 : 8 .97 t 1 .97 :66 .17
5 .52 : 28 .31
.65 : 4 .62 : 6 .33 : 9 .45 :23 .16 ; 1 .03 : 4.51 : 6 .28 ; 1 .81 : 58 .88 :26 .22
4 .20 : 1 .90 :67 .65 : 6 .54 : 55 .80
.44 ; 3 .17 : 4 .69 : 6 .48 :19 .37 : 1 .18 : 4 .97 : 5 .52 1 .77 : 56 .82 :27 .72: 4 .63% 1 .90 :55 .40;19 .02 : 25 .68
.42 : 4 .09: 5 .oE :'= :zo - wJ :-ITUV ; -TITh-7735- : 1 .225 : 27 .41 :26 .62 6 .52 ' t -rZ5- :62
..10
t
5 .64
0 .33: 1 .66 : 2 .89 : 2 .67 :13 .20 ; 1 .66 ; 5.42 ; 8 .86
3 .97
51 .45 :33 .21
8 .60 • 2 .03 62 .88 :11.10 : 26 .02
6 .19 10 .36: 3 .03: 3 .46 : 3 .34 ;14 .49 : 1 .62 : 5 .60 : 8 .52 , 3 .57 : 54 :04 :31 .27 : 8 .09 : 1 .91 :62 .96 :10 .99 ; 26 .05
: 4 .87 :0 .62 : 2 .47 : 2.86 : 2 .08 :12 .69 : 1 .56 : 5 .06 : 6 .72 : 2 .97 : 64 .78 :30 .43 : 6 .65 : 1 .65 :59 .37 :11 .64 : 28 .97
: 6 .91
: 2 .74 : 3 .23 : 2 .11 :12 .67 : 1 .64 : 4 .92 . 7 .37 ; 3 .17: 65 .17 :30 .27 : 5 .26 : 1 .64 :65 .52 :10 .61 : 33 .97
:--COV-- OT:3i'2747i :rECT;5E :13.41 :'775T : -3723s-TWIV-:-3 .42 5395O732- i-773tri-r778- :WE761reEn2Sg- s 26 .25
.
.
.
t
: 5 .32 :0 .38 ; 3 .09 : 4.87 : 3 .53 :17 .37 ; 0 .96 :• 6 .34 :11 .01
1 .20
29 .94 :58 .14
9.53
2 .13 48.47 15 .42
36 .11
: 4 .63 :0 .27 ; 2 .53 ; 3 .62 : 4 .69 ;13 .81 ; 1 .04 : 6 .29 ; 9 .99 : 1 .60 ; 44 .10 :37 .73 : 7 .90 : 1 .71 :41 .42 :12 .77 : 45 .81
; 5 .42 :0 .38 ; 6 .31 ; 7.64 : 4 .90%21 .89 ; 0 .73 : 6 .09 :10 .70
1 .26 ; 40 .76 :37 .17 : 9 .83 : 2 .15 ;50 .90 : 6 .82 : 42 .28
5 .32
41 .60 :2776"B- : -97DW- C-179'9- :13791- :11767- : 41 .66
.
:
▪
:
..
:
t
; 9 .64 :0 .22 ; 7 .31 ;• 9.77 ; 1 .00 :20 .06 ; 1 .03 :• 6.27 : 7 .95 : 2 .77 : 48 .67 :34 .18 : 7 .40 : 2 .09 :78 .81 : 2 .95 : 18 .24
; 9 .71 10 .20 ; 7 .40 ; 9 .94 ; 1 .14119 .94 : 1 .13 : 5 .16 ; 7 .67 : 2 .74 ; 48 .23:34 .26 : - 22- : 2-2- :
: -222
--T-g-Mr- := :-'r-'sge-gi-su :-1-:m :7=15s"IM :--57''af-7".-o- :-2-:75- :-157:415 :"3401-. r :-77Ttr : 2.09 :T5 : 18 .24
:
:
•
:
: 6 .18 :0 .21 ; 2 .60: 3.56 : 4 .00 ;15 .97 : 1 .21 : 4 .38 : 6 .75 : 3 .41 : 58 .53125 .22 : 4 .47 : 1 .69 :70 .66 :18 .16 : 11 .26
: 7 .68 ;2420 : 1 .73 : 2 .67 : 6 .42 :12 .70 : 0 .94 ; 4 .59 ; 7 .19 ; 3 .25 ; 62 .29 :24 .16 : 5 .65 : 2.97 :64 .34 :10 .69 ; 24 .9 7
7 .00 :0 .18 ; 3 .92 ; 7 .25 ; 3 .98 :15 .92 : 1 .37 : 4 .96 : 6 .48 : 3 .33 ; 69 .40 :27 .65 : 5 .19
1 .68 ;74 .29 : 9 .17 : 16 .54
: 7 .15 :0 .19 : 4 .40 ; 4.78 : 4 .63 :16 .51 : 1 .09 : 4 .41 : 7 .46 : 2 .90: 58 .61%26 .82 : 5 .96 s 1 .56 :49 .27:27 .27: 23 .46
: 5-15150-- :2, :2f 5-551626.692-4-53655TM :515= ; -4-665;-55555- : 3.2Z :-5557TT :25 :54C5:715738- 1 -T7555:64 .61 :16-32 : - 19 .06 :
:0 .40 : 7 .75 ; 8 .20, 6 .70 ;24 .62 •; 0 .70 : 5 .00 : 7 .33 : 3 .48 ; 55 .33 ;
: 8 .38 : 1 .26
:
:0 .34 : 6 .60 :'6 .03; 6 .70 :21 .07 : 0 .23 : 4.90 : 7 .62 : 3 .29 : 67 .53 ;
: 7 .19 : 1 .3 9
10 .351 5 .40% 6 .78 : 2 .65 :18 .69 : 0 .62 ; 5 .26 : 7 .67 : 3 .87 : 61 .41 ;
1
7 .39
1 .03
:
:0 .38 : 6 .06 : 7 .57 : 9 .23 :24 .87 : 0 .79 : 5 .03 : 7 .43 : 3 .67 : 69 .67 :
7 .90 : 0 .95
:
gn7PI :637 :118:35E :2E 7671- 7612 :
:2 : T8:4H ;
:
:
•:
: 6 .56 : 1 .2 5
;0 .40 ; 3 .79 : 6 .62 ; 0 .94 :15 .82 : 0 .93 : 4 .211 6 .03 •; 4 .24 ; 61 .97 :
:
:0 .37 : 3 .16 ; 6 .07 : 1 .00 :16 .761 1 .01 ; 5 .17 ; 6 .30 ; 4 .64 : 57 .00 :
:
:0 .35 : 2 .94 : 6 .36 ; 1 .11 :15 .12 ; 1 .13 : 4.88 ; 6 .00 ; 4 .38 : 63 .08 :
63 .82 : :
:0 .38 : 4 .25 : 6 .96 : 1 .02 ;16 .72 : 1 .07 : 4.92 : 5 .73: 4 .38
: 5 .12: 1 .15 :
:.
:D:18 :-375T,-Z 6b :-r:62 :1-6:1r: 517dZ :-473Fs 6 .02 :-T741- :-gl7ZT :
5 .54
1 .20
•
:
;
•
:
:0 .21 :10 .45 :12 .57 : 0 .72 ;22 .07 : 0 .61 : 5 .08 ;11 .16 : 2 .47 : 58 .25 :
: 9 .12 : 1 .40 :
;
;0 .32 ;11 .00 ;12 .40 ;
0 .91 : 4 .91 ;11 .04 ; 2 .83 % 58 .71 :
8 .41 : 1 .22 :
:
:0 .22 : 8 .16 :10 .08 : 0 .93 :19 .44 : 0 .76 ; 6 .08 :10 .22 ; 3 .14 : 60 .91 :
; :0 .16 :12 .83 :15 .30 : 0 .83 :25 .11 : 0 .55 ; 606 ;10 .78 5 2 .00 : 23 .31 :
; ; . :; :
:D723:1.0:6T :11759 :- 6BSCET717 :51r7l : -5703 :71:17PZ- s -2-:81- :37 M :
; -55351- :=;
.
t
:
:
:
:0 .33; 1 .28 : 1 .88 ; 1 .96 :11 .33 : 1 .58 : 6 .31 :10 .78
3 .08 : 62 .61 :
:10 .26 : 0 .83 :
: 9 .29 : 0 .68 :
:0 .29 : 0 .92 : 2 .26 : 0 .90 :11 .58 : 1 .67 : 5 .26 :10 :31 ; 3 .52 : 63 .29%
0 .30 : 1 .451 2 .52 : 0 .97 ;12 .15 : 1 .49 ; 5.29 ;10 .04 ; 3 .95 t 60 .43 ;
:
:0 .32 : 0 .82% 1 .88 ; 1 .63510 .65 : 1 .75 ; 5 .32 :10 .42 : 3 .64
61 .09 ;
9 .33
0 .66
:
:173I:-17rE;314 :6.36 :IT:57s633 :75730 :10- 39 - :-5756- s -61-7W
•
4 :10
0 .18 ; 4 .14 ; 6 .26 ; 0 .74 :22 .59 : 5 .70 : 6 .34 :20 .02
'226 6 1 59 .40 :23 .29 23 .22
25222 :55 .50 1 . .21' '
2 .2 4
: 3 .95 :0 .81 ; 4 .32 ; 6 .15 : 0 .73 :25 .33 : 6 .70 : 6 .19 :20 .00 :
-66 .50 :26 .07 ;25 .46 : - 222 :55 .91 : 1 .95
41 .1 4
: 3 .26 :0 .82 : 4 .22 : 5 .92 : 0 .80 :23 .91 : 4 .40 : 5 .35 :19 .13 : 2262
57 .27 :26 .20 ;20 .30 : -22- :58 .15 ;12 .22' : 19 .25
; 3 .36 :0 .91 ; 3 .72 ; 6 .08 ; 0 .98 :22 .93 : 5 .13 ; 6 .09 ;19 .22 : - 26 - : 58 .95 ;24 .86 ;22 .32
22-- 121 .22 :19 .2?' • 22 .21
:emu .
:5:832-127T5 :215562 -555:2U1,12375b ; -5725 :22774 :12 - 52
-2-2 : 22 .03 :24 .86- :'2E .-02 :
.
.
•
4 :53
0 .57 :12.55 :16 .27 : 2 .20 :28 .72 : 1 .53 : 5 .68 :14 .01
2 .59
44 .79120 .21' 11 .29
1 :07 72 .00
1 .73 : 22 .2 7
: 6 .10 ;0 .58 :13 .50 :15 .77 : ---- :30 .08 : 1 .70 ; 6 .69 :13 .99 ; 0 .69 : 45 .28 :30 .15 :17 .99
1 .21 :76 .71 ; 2 .56 : 20 .73
: 6 .16 :0 .49 :12 .68 :15 .56 : 2 .33 :29 .60 : 2 .63 : 5 .29 :12 .56 : 1 .11 : : 45 .81 :31 .28 :17 .57 : 2222 :76 .40
2 .0( : 21 .64
: 6 .20 :0 .60 :11 .74 :13 .77 : 2 .37 :26 .69 : 2 .37 : 5 .66 :13 .95 : 0 .34
45 .97130 .22 :17,44
0 .96 :75 .83 ; 3 .04
20 .1 2
:-57PT- s'07:51:1-2:52:1-57579 ;-2;3T):'213-:52 :--r.a2r : -5 .763 :13796-- :' -C''Nir : -C5:113s8r.Tr :177,79-y-c-mr-:1
.." : 31 .1 2
.
.
•
2 .15 ; 1 .85 : 2 .84 : 1 .27 :20 .37 ; 5 .75 : 6 .71 :17 .61
6 .50
0 .88
54 .04 :26 .52 19 .29
1 .36 72 .24
2 .27
24 .2 8
: 6 .44 :2 .09 ; 1 .68 ; 2 .74 ; 1 .19 ;2C .36 : 5 .85 : 5 .65 :17 :79: 0 .83; 64 .24 :26 .47 : :
: 2-2:
_
: 2 .47 :2712; -157T:-2:79 : 517.22 :20 -25 :22:565 ; -T5751 :11 .65 : U .8ti : 54 .12 :255TO- :1770- :- 1 .52 :117755-255TV- :-521 . 2
6 .32
8 .28
: 6 .89
5 .19
Mean ;
6 .42
1
(105 0C samples) .
:
:
55 .60 :23 .83 21 .33
1 .64 75 .27
2 .24
22 .09
66 .85 ;2344 :22 .45 : 1 .19 :77 .38: 3 .01: 12 .21
26 .2252575T- 52r:gg5 :=I- :16 .32 2
.82: 20 .35
69 .67124 .04 20 .35
5 .92 67 .85 • 2 .11
31 .04
58 .53 :25 .24 :21 .62
2 .44 :69 .76 ; 0 .00 : 31 .25
56 .45 ;25 .07 :20 .10 : 2 .24 :68 .99 ; 0 .02 : 31 .2 1
65 .83 :26 .74:21 .76 : 1 .26
t 222-
-2--
22;63 ;25 .07
o .7o
311 0
▪
..
3 .72
62 .92 :
;24 .48
1 .1 9
3 .85 : 62 .41 :
;23 .54
1 .46 :
3 .68 ; 54 .66 :
;26 .61 : 1 .6 2
4 .16 : 63 .13 :
:21 .89 ; 1 .45 :
3 .23 : 62 .08 :
24 .86 : 2 .00 :
:7474:5
. :656-:
▪
•
3 .18 : 60 .49;
28 .40 : 1 .1 1
3 .12
61 .08 :
;29 .26 ; 1 .32
2 .25 ; 61 .82 :
:26 .65 : 1 .04
2 .21: 61 .85 :
2 .69
:-TTTU":
0 .20 ; 2 .24 : 3 .84 ; 1 .60 :22 .43% 5 .78 : 6 .23 ;19 .82
:0 .74: 1 .63 : 2 .94 ; 1 .14 ;21 .61 : 6 .14 : 6 .05 :19 .54
:0 .96 : 3 .14 : 5 .66 : 3 .59 :26 .93: 6 .46 : 6 .11 :20 .37 :
:0 .94 : 1 .23 ; 3.22 : 0 .89 :21 .46 : 6 .41 ; 5.91 ;19 .14 :
:0 .55 : 2 .55 : 4 .67 : 2 .66525 .385 6 .18 : 5 .72 :20 .79
:7.7gra-ET2 :-crt :-1-:17s :MTS's-T.779-:-=119 :
:
:0 .58 : 2 .88 :• 4 .21 : 0 .55120 .02 ;• 3 .99 : 6 .12 ;24 .26
:0 .57 : 2 .58 ; 3 .87 ; 0 .67 :20 .20 ; 4 .39 : 6 .03 :25 .40 :
:0 .64 : 3 .16 : 4 .66, 0 .64 :19 .51 : 3 .81 ; 5 .19 :23 .00 ;
:0 .37 : 2 .06 : 3.16 ; 0 .63 :19 .65 : 6 .02 ; 5.92 ;25 .86 :
:D752 :52767 :5-5791 :5222515 :11755 :-r53r : 52721 :24 - 53- :
:
:
•
:0 .46 : 2 .60 : 4 .27 : 0 .29 ;16 .98 ; 4 .26 : 7.22 ;21 .10 ; 2 .50 ; 60 .76 :
10 .61 ; 2 .73 : 4 .22 : 0 .22 ;17 .20; 4 .25 ; 7.23 :21 .90
2 .14 : 61 .67 ;
;0 .40 ; 2 .94 : 4 .78 : 0 .30 :18 .04 : 4 .60 : 7 .25 :22 .21 : 2 .06 : 60 .20 :
:0 .38 : 2 .33 : 4 .15 ; 0 .20 ;18.35 ; 4 .74 : 7 .28 ;21 .62 ; 2 .85 : 60 .48 ;
:02q12;'T'l;6-5 :-57US :-0:E517:5"4 2W74S' : -7725 :21771- 2-2739-:-50;TU :
:21 .02 ; 1 .04
:25 .22 : 1 .05 :
:25 .85 ; 1 .00 :
:25 .20 ; 0 .77 :
:2515745r :-0:515-: