Cell Agglomeration in Acidogenic, Mixed, and Methanogenic Cultures at Different Loading and Mixing Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell agglomeration studies were conducted in anaerobic fluidized bed reactors without any external support. Granulation was studied at different combinations of loading and mixing conditions utilizing synthetic wastewater. Both single-stage and two-stage biomethanation processes were studied. Reactors of volume 0.55, 10, and 16 l were operated with height to diameter ratio of 7-8. It was found that the acidogens were more liable to form granules among mixed culture of anaerobes, while the methanogens were capable of forming cell agglomerates in the form of flocs. In acidogenic granules, rod shaped bacteria were dominating, while in case of methanogens, there were more cocci. It was found that for an upflow liquid linear velocity upto 2.0 m h(-1), acidogens showed very good granulation but at relatively higher values of upflow liquid linear velocities granulation was affected adversely, causing breakage and dissociation of granules. In the case of methanogens and mixed process, it was found that upflow liquid linear velocities up to 4.0 m h(-1) were suitable and biomass flocs were actively growing. The maximum organic loadings applied were 39.0 and 54.4 kg COD m(-3) d(-1) (at 27.3 and 35.36 kg COD m(-3) d(-1) degradation respectively) for single-stage and two-stage biomethanation respectively.
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".