MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118038778 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2009.025

Biological Phosphorus Removal and Denitrification of a Fish Farm Effluent in a Sequencing Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor

2009· article· en· W2118038778 on OpenAlexafffund
Juan D. Restrepo, Marc‐André Labelle, Serge Parent, Richard Villemur, Pierre Juteau, Yves Comeau

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueMontreal BiodomePolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsDenitrificationEffluentAnoxic watersChemistryPhosphorusEnhanced biological phosphorus removalChemical oxygen demandSequencing batch reactorNitrateBioreactorPhosphateEnvironmental chemistryPulp and paper industryBlackwaterAnaerobic exerciseEnvironmental engineeringNitrogenWastewaterActivated sludgeEnvironmental scienceBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207