MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Removal of organic matter and nutrients from slaughterhouse wastewater by using Eichhornia crassipes and evaluation of the generated biomass composting

2009· article· en· W1972887165 on OpenAlex
Juliana Bortoli Rodrigues Mees, Simone Gomes, Márcio Antônio Vilas Boas, Ajadir Fazolo, Sílvio C. Sampaio

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngenharia Agrícola · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEichhornia crassipesHyacinthMacrophyteNutrientBiomass (ecology)Organic matterCompostAquatic plantEnvironmental scienceWastewaterAnimal scienceAgronomyPulp and paper industryChemistryEnvironmental engineeringBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research was to evaluate the performance of the aquatic macrophyte Eichhornia crassipes applied in situ in a slaughter house treatment system, located in the west of the Paraná state, Brazil, regarding the nutrients removal and organic matter. Moreover, it aimed to obtain data from the production, management and composting practices of the biomass generated in the system. During 11 months of macrophytes development, physic and chemical parameters were monitored and plant density was controlled by periodical removal of excess biomass, which was weekly monitored and it is expressed in kg of aquatic plant per m² covered area. The degradation of the macrophytes removed from the treatment system was evaluated at the pilot scale in eight composting piles of 0.60 m³ that underwent four different treatments and two repetitions: T1 - water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes); T2 - water hyacinth and swine excrement (7:1), T3 - water hyacinth, swine excrement and earth (7:1:0,67), and T4 - water hyacinth, swine excrement and cellulosic gut (7:1:0,67), for a period of 90 days. The results indicated maximum removal efficiencies of 77.2% for COD; 77.8% for BOD, 87.9% for total nitrogen, 47.5% for ammonia nitrogen and 38.9% for total phosphorus for a five-day retention time. For biomass stabilization by composting, considering the C:N ratio as an indicator of compost maturity, it was observed that treatment T4 resulted in the shortest stabilization period (60 days). No difference was verified in the biostabilization rates at 5% level by the F test.

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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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