Controlled Field Study on the Use of Nitrate and Oxygen for Bioremediation of a Gasoline Source Zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlled releases of unleaded gasoline were used to evaluate the biotransformation of the soluble aromatic hydrocarbons (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene isomers, trimethylbenzene isomers, and naphthalene) within a source zone using nitrate and oxygen as electron acceptors. Experiments were performed within two 2 m×2 m×3.5 m deep sheet-piling cells. A gasoline-contaminated zone was created below the water table in each treatment cell. Groundwater amended with electron acceptors was then flushed continuously through the cells for 174 d. One cell received approximately 100 mg/L nitrate and “microaerophilic” (i.e., 2 mg/L or less) dissolved oxygen (DO), a second cell received micro aerophilic DO only. Electron-acceptor utilization and hydrocarbon-metabolite formation were observed in both cells, suggesting that some microbial activity had been induced in response to flushing. However, nitrate utilization was slow relative to the cell residence time, and aromatic-hydrocarbon mass losses in response to microaerophilic DO addition were not apparent under these in situ conditions. Concentration trends in both cells suggested that there was relatively little biotransformation of the aromatic hydrocarbons over the 2-m flow path monitored in this experiment. Extraction-well concentration trends, for example, were consistent with abiotic gasoline dissolution. The results from the nitrate-amended cell suggest that a large denitrifying population capable of aromatic hydrocarbon biotransformation failed to develop within the gasoline source zone over a 14-month period of nitrate exposure. This study reinforces the need for detailed aquifer-specific testing prior to selecting bioremediation for full-scale cleanup, particularly for recent hydrocarbon spills.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".