Strain and factor selection for carbon dioxide fixation using microalgae cultivated in oil sands process water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Biological fixation of CO2 using microalgae is a potential CO2 reduction strategy which can be applied to the oil sands operations in Alberta. These operations also produce large amounts of oil sands process water (OSPW), which can act as a growth medium for the microalgae. In this study, three different microalgae: Botryococcus braunii, Chlorella pyrenoidosa and Chlorella kessleri were investigated for their ability to grow in OSPW, and to uptake CO2. Also, the effect of phosphate, nitrate, CO2 concentrations and light intensity were studied using a fractional two‐level and a full two‐level factorial design. These investigations eliminated Botryococcus braunii as it cannot grow in OSPW, and demonstrated that Chlorella kessleri has a higher CO2 uptake rate than Chlorella pyrenoidosa. Moreover, CO2 concentration, light intensity and phosphate concentration proved to have the strongest effects (in that order) on the growth and CO2 uptake rate of Chlorella kessleri.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".