Continuous Co‐biodegradation of linear and cyclic naphthenic acids in circulating packed‐bed bioreactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous co‐biodegradation of a linear and three cyclic surrogate naphthenic acids namely octanoic acid, trans‐4‐methyl‐1‐cyclohexane carboxylic acid (trans‐4MCHCA), and cis‐ and trans‐4‐methyl‐1‐cyclohexane‐acetic acids (cis‐4MCHAA and trans‐4MCHAA) at concentrations of 100, 50, and 50 mg/L, respectively, was investigated in two circulating packed‐bed bioreactors. Using different combinations of naphthenic acids in the bioreactor influent effects of loading rate on biodegradation of each compound was evaluated. In all tested mixtures biodegradation of octanoic acid proceeded with the fastest rate, followed by trans‐4MCHCA, trans‐4MCHAA, and cis‐4MCHAA. Biodegradation of the linear compound (octanoic acid) was not influenced by the presence of any cyclic compound, even the most recalcitrant naphthenic acid with the highest removal rate of 372.8 mg/L‐h observed at a loading rate of 666.7 mg/L‐h. Presence of octanoic acid negatively impacted the biodegradation of trans‐4MCHCA, with the removal rates of trans‐4MCHCA in the presence and absence of octanoic acid being 74.6 and 208.8 mg/L‐h, respectively. With cis‐ and tran‐4MCHAA, presence of octanoic acid improved the biodegradation of these compounds. In a mixture containing all three cyclic compounds, the maximum removal rates for cis‐ and trans‐4MCHAA were 0.5 and 1.3 mg/L‐h, respectively, which improved to 1.7 and 2.4 mg/L‐h when octanoic acid was included in the mixture. © 2013 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 33: 835–843, 2014
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".