Protocols To Enhance Biodegradation of Hydrocarbon Contaminants in Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protocols were developed to determine whether microbial metabolism limits the ultimate removal of contaminants from soil. Two soils were used: a creosote contaminated soil and a soil contaminated with crude oil. A laboratory-scale slurry-phase bioreactor was used to maximize the rate of desorption of components from the soil to the aqueous phase. The protocols to enhance the ultimate removal of hydrocarbons were as follows: stimulation of the bacterial cultures with either naphthalene or a mixture of anthracene and phenanthrene, the use of static conditions to enhance bacterial attachment to the nonaqueous phase liquids in the soil, and increased incubation temperature. Addition of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds did not stimulate removal of individual target compounds, classes of compounds or total thermally extractable organics. A comparison of well-mixed and static culture conditions showed equivalent removal, except for the lightest PAH and petroleum fractions that were removed more under well-mixed conditions. Increasing the temperature to 30°C from 21°C gave more rapid initial removal of petroleum components, but the ultimate removal was unaffected. Removal of components from the creosote-contaminated soil was unaffected by temperature. These results suggest that desorption of contaminants from the soils limited the ultimate removal of contaminants, not the biological activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".