MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082610758 · doi:10.1080/09593332208618246

Nutrient Stimulation of Sulfolane Biodegradation in a Contaminated Soil from a Sour Natural Gas Plant and in a Pristine Soil

2001· article· en· W2082610758 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth A. Greene, Phillip M. Fedorak

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrocosmSulfolaneBiodegradationTopsoilEnvironmental chemistryNutrientEnvironmental scienceSoil contaminationContaminationBioremediationSoil waterChemistryNitrogenEcologySoil scienceBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural gas in western Canada can contain up to 35% H2S. The Sulfinol process for sour gas treatment makes use of sulfolane and an amine to remove H2S and other sour components from natural gas. Sulfolane has leached into groundwaters at sour gas treatment plant sites, and poses a risk for off-site contamination. Sulfolane biodegradation was monitored in shake-flask cultures and air-sparged microcosms inoculated with uncontaminated topsoil or with sulfolane contaminated soil obtained near a Sulfinol process building at a sour gas treatment facility in western Canada. For both soils, supplementation with a source of fixed nitrogen stimulated sulfolane biodegradation. Topsoil cultures and microcosms were only slightly affected by the addition of phosphate. Contaminated soil microcosms and cultures were stimulated by phosphate addition, but not to the same degree as by the addition of nitrogen. For these cultures and microcosms, amendment with both fixed nitrogen and phosphate produced an additive effect. It was possible to predict the nutrient requirements of air-sparged microcosms inoculated with each soil type using shake-flask cultures. Shake-flask cultures require less time and effort and fewer materials than the more complex air-sparged soil microcosms, and will be useful for large-scale experiments to predict the nutrient supplements required for bioremediation of sulfolane-contaminated sites.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.165
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental TechnologySame topicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionFrench-language works237,207