Sequential anaerobic/aerobic biotreatment of bark leachate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bark leachate is generated from sawmill operations such as log storage sites and contains polymeric tannins, carbohydrates, organic acids, phenolic and resin compounds. The present study was aimed at assessing the performance of a sequential anaerobic and aerobic treatment, for both chemical oxygen demand (COD) and phenol removal, under various combinations of operational conditions, in the continuous mode. After anaerobic treatment in a five litres upflow anaerobic sludge bed (UASB) reactor, the leachate was directed into two parallel aerobic reactors, either an activated sludge unit or a fixed film submerged filter (packed with polyethylene Flexirings), both of a volume of one litre and oxygenated by air diffusion. For a leachate of 22 gCOD/l, an overall COD removal of 96-98% was achieved at an hydraulic residence time (HRT) of 4 days for the anaerobic reactor and one day for either aerobic systems. The phenol concentration generally increased after anaerobic treatment but was below the detection limit (50 ppb) after aerobic polishing. Radiorespirometric microcosms with 14C-labelled phenol confirmed that phenol was mineralized in the aerobic reactors. The performances of both aerobic systems were similar for COD and phenol removal. Thus, a sequential anaerobic/aerobic treatment was able to effectively address the contamination of a bark leachate discharge, including phenols.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".