Laboratory study on potential mechanisms for treatment of woodwaste leachate in surface flow constructed wetlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory tests were conducted on volatilization, adsorption on silt loam, and on the biological treatability of woodwaste leachate. No significant volatilization was found despite the high concentration of volatile fatty acids. Tannin and lignin adsorption reached equilibration within 78 h. Adsorption at a silt loam:leachate volume ratio of 2:25, equivalent to a 2 cm effective soil layer underlying a 25 cm water column in a surface flow constructed wetland, removed 22–42% tannin and lignin and 6–27% chemical oxygen demand at 23 ºC. Tannin and lignin accounted for the majority of the adsorbed chemical oxygen demand. Adsorption followed the Langmuir isotherm, with an adsorption capacity of 36 mg tannin and lignin/g silt loam. Adsorption efficiency for tannin and lignin at 15 °C was 0.44 times that at 23 °C. An aerated reactor removed 62–67% chemical oxygen demand, 65–67% tannin and lignin, and ≥98% volatile fatty acids. A similar anaerobic reactor removed 28–29% chemical oxygen demand, 13–19% tannin and lignin, and 80–94% volatile fatty acids. In long-term operation, biological degradation would be the major mechanism for organic carbon removal from woodwaste leachate in surface flow constructed wetlands. Sediment adsorption would affect treatment performance mainly during initial and transitional operating periods.Key words: adsorption, biological treatability, volatilization, woodwaste leachate, surface flow constructed wetland.
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 | 0.001 | 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".