Évaluation de l'adsorption de deux bactéries fécales par l'horizon argilo-sableux et l'horizon quartzo-feldspathique d'un sol ferralitique au Cameroun (Afrique Centrale)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A laboratory study has been carried out to assess the retention capacity of Streptococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli by two ferralitic soil horizons: the upper soil horizon (HA), linked to the soil surface and of sandy-clayed texture, and the deeper soil horizon (HQ), related to the groundwater table and of quartzo-feldspathic texture. Bacterial sorption on soil particles swiftly took place during the first 30 min that followed mixture of bacteria to the aqueous medium containing soil. The number of adsorbed bacteria sometimes undergoes temporal fluctuations. From Freundlich isotherms used, the linear coefficient of HA led from 0.5139 to 0.8932 and that of HQ varied from 0.0634 to 0.5849. It was lower when E. coli and S. faecalis were present at the same time, and greater when S. faecalis only was present. The adsorption coefficient of HA varied from 174 to 49.55 x 106 bacteria/mg of soil, and that of HQ varied from 4026 to 13.74 x 104 bacteria/mg of soil. A low adsorption coefficient of HA is seen when S. faecalis only is present, and that of HQ is also low when E. coli only is present. In the presence of the two bacterial species, adsorption coefficients of the two soil horizons rises. Key words: Escherichia coli, Streptococcus faecalis, adsorption, sandy-clayed soil, quartzo-feldspathic soil.[Journal translation]
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".