Question

Why do you suppose the structural polysaccharide cellulose does not contain branches? Why do you suppose the structural polysaccharide cellulose does not contain branches? Branches in the molecule would generate side chains that would almost certainly make it difficult to pack the cellulose molecules into globules, thereby decreasing the flexibility and strength of the globules. Branches in the molecule would generate side chains that would almost certainly make it difficult to pack the cellulose molecules into microfibrils, thereby increasing the rigidity and strength of the microfibrils. Branches in the molecule would generate side chains that would almost certainly make it difficult to pack the cellulose molecules into globules, thereby increasing the flexibility and strength of the globules. Branches in the molecule would generate side chains that would almost certainly make it difficult to pack the cellulose molecules into microfibrils, thereby decreasing the rigidity and strength of the microfibrils.

Answer 1

The correct statement is that branches in the molecule would generate side chains that would almost certainly make it difficult to pack the cellulose molecules into microfibrils, thereby decreasing the rigidity and strength of the microfibrils.

The prime polysaccharide found in the plants, which is responsible for the structural role is cellulose. It is one of the most naturally abundant organic constituents found on Earth. It is an unbranched polymer of glucose residues, which is combined together through beta-1,4 linkages that permit the molecules to produce straight and long chains. The cellulose molecules are linear, rigid rods, which combines laterally into microfibrils.