Biological Phosphorus Removal and Denitrification of a Fish Farm Effluent in a Sequencing Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Removal of phosphate and nitrate from the effluent of a fish farm with a recirculation system was tested in a sequencing moving bed biofilm bioreactor (SMBBR) over a 160-day period. This bioprocess made use of a stock tank (ST) that allowed the same volume of anaerobic water to be reused from one batch to another. Water from the ST contained an excess of a carbon source (acetate), which made it possible to alternate between anaerobic (1.5 h) and aerobic/anoxic (4 h) conditions to achieve enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR). The developed biomass (2,072 mg total solids m-2 d-1 and 892 mg total volatile solids m-2 d-1 ) removed 7.5 mg of PO4-P per litre and 8.5 mg of NO3-N per litre from an influent containing 10 mg of PO4-P per litre and 21 mg NO3-N per litre. The dynamic variation of phosphate and chemical oxygen demand (COD) in the influent showed that the biomass was sensitive to the CODavailable/Pinfluent ratio. A ratio of 10 to 15 mg of COD per milligram of P seemed to favour phosphorus accumulating organisms (PAOs). Differences between the nitrate, phosphate, and oxygen reduction kinetics suggested that the denitrification could be attributed to organisms other than PAOs. The SMBBR-ST showed potential for EBPR and for denitrification as well. However, the economic feasibility of implementing such a process in a full-scale operation remains to be demonstrated.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".