Removal of phosphorus and residual aluminium with the simultaneous use of chitosan and alum on the effluent of an MBBR biological system during start-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physico–chemical treatment with aluminium salts is a common practice to remove total phosphorus (TP) from wastewaters. However, the use of alum can increase the residual aluminium concentration both in the effluent and biosolids. Chitosan, an alternative coagulant, does not allow for the removal of TP below the requirement level when lower than the soluble phosphorus fraction of the water. Hence, simultaneous dosage of alum and chitosan solutions was evaluated on the effluent of a newly installed MBBR (moving bed biofilm reactor) system for residual TP and aluminium removal. At alum optimal dosage, the most effective chitosan solution generated: 1) an optimal dosage zone for which residual TP and aluminium concentrations were minimal; 2) maximal abatements for TP and aluminium that reached 35 and 85%, respectively, the concentrations observed with alum only. Also, the fraction of residual aluminium in the biosolids was increased, particularly from 84 to 98% at optimal chitosan dosage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".