MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implication of Using Different Carbon Sources for Denitrification in Wastewater Treatments

2009· article· en· W1479782288 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenitrificationDenitrifying bacteriaEffluentNitrateWastewaterEnvironmental engineeringChemistrySewage treatmentAnoxic watersEnvironmental chemistryCarbon fibersNitrogenEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Application of external carbon sources for denitrification becomes necessary for wastewater treatment plants that have to meet very stringent effluent nitrogen limits (e.g., 3 to 5 mgTN/L). In this study, we evaluated and compared three carbon sources--MicroC (Environmental Operating Solutions, Bourne, Massachusetts), methanol, and acetate-in terms of their denitrification rates and kinetics, effect on overall nitrogen removal performance, and microbial community structure of carbon-specific denitrifying enrichments. Denitrification rates and kinetics were determined with both acclimated and non-acclimated biomass, obtained from laboratory-scale sequencing batch reactor systems or full-scale plants. The results demonstrate the feasibility of the use of MicroC for denitrification processes, with maximum denitrification rates (k(dmax)) of 6.4 mgN/gVSSh and an observed yield of 0.36 mgVSS/mgCOD. Comparable maximum nitrate uptake rates were found with methanol, while acetate showed a maximum denitrification rate nearly twice as high as the others. The maximum growth rates measured at 20 degrees C for MicroC and methanol were 3.7 and 1.2 day(-1), respectively. The implications resulting from the differences in the denitrification rates and kinetics of different carbon sources on the full-scale nitrogen removal performance, under various configurations and operational conditions, were assessed using Biowin (EnviroSim Associates, Ltd., Flamborough, Ontario, Canada) simulations for both pre- and post-denitrification systems. Examination of microbial population structures using Automated Ribosomal Intergenic Spacer Analysis (ARISA) throughout the study period showed dynamic temporal changes and distinct microbial community structures of different carbon-specific denitrifying cultures. The ability of a specific carbon-acclimated denitrifying population to instantly use other carbon source also was investigated, and the chemical-structure-associated behavior patterns observed suggested that the complex biochemical pathways/enzymes involved in the denitrification process depended on the carbon sources used.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it