MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132555749 · doi:10.1139/s08-036

The microbial characterization of a hydroponic treatment step for domestic wastewater — towards an expanded view on the plant–microbial hydroecology

2008· article· en· W2132555749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anna Norström, Gunnel Dalhammar, Natuschka Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNitrifying bacteriaNitrificationAmmoniumWastewaterMicrobial population biologySewage treatmentEnvironmental chemistryProteobacteriaBiologyNitrogenBacteriaChemistryEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to explore the microbial composition in the hydroponic step of a pilot plant for treatment of domestic wastewater under temperate climate conditions. The pilot plant was designed for nitrogen removal and operated at constant conditions. The microbial composition was investigated over a period of 6 months using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to identify key microbial groups. Nitrification rate measurements confirmed the presence and activity of aerobic nitrifying populations. The FISH analysis demonstrated that Proteobacteria, followed by Nitrospirae and Planctomycetes, represented the three most abundant bacterial groups. Interestingly, further FISH studies suggested the presence of one other bacterial group associated with ammonium-oxidizing processes: anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing bacteria within the Planctomycetales. This suggests that the nitrogen turnover in hydroponics systems may be attributed to more complex processes than previous models based only on those performed by aerobic ammonium-oxidizing bacteria.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207