MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>Bacillus Thuringiensis</i> Fermentation of Primary and Mixed Sludge: Rheology and Process Performance

2008· article· en· W2043856542 on OpenAlexaff
Satinder Kaur Brar, M. Verma, R.D. Tyagi, Rao Y. Surampalli, José R. Lerma Valero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersYale University
KeywordsFermentationRheologyPulp and paper industryRaw materialChemistryActivated sludgeFood scienceWastewaterMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bench scale fermentation of primary, mixed, and secondary (raw and hydrolyzed) sludge and starch industry wastewater was carried out using Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) var. kurstaki HD-1 to test their feasibility as potential growth substrates on the basis of rheology and process performance in comparison to soyameal (semisynthetic) commercial medium. All fermented media exhibited pseudoplastic pattern, followed power law for viscosity with greater shear thinning for primary sludge (raw and hydrolyzed). Improved rheology correlated well with the fermented broth morphology. The total cell and viable spore counts, oxygen consumption, maximum specific growth rate (μmax), and entomotoxicity were, respectively, 2, 4, 1.5–2, and 3 folds lower in primary sludge in contrast to mixed sludge, rendering primary sludge unsuitable as raw material for Bt fermentation and eventual formulation. Further, the rheology studies of secondary sludge and starch industry wastewater proved them to be good Bt fermentation alternatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.164 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental EngineeringSame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207