MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144800030 · doi:10.1139/s07-054

Effect of initial microbial density on inactivation of <i>Escherichia coli</i> by monochloramine

2008· article· en· W2144800030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baris Kaymak, Charles N. Haas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAmerican Water Works Association Research Foundation
KeywordsChemostatEscherichia coliDisinfectantWater disinfectionNutrientHydraulic retention timeChemistryMicrobiologyResidence time (fluid dynamics)Food scienceNutrient agarMicroorganismOptical densityBacterial growthBacteriaEnvironmental chemistryBiologyBiochemistryAgarEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringEffluent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous water disinfection studies have reported deviations from the Chick-Watson Law, which was used to develop the Ct tables provided by the USEPA’s SWTR. Some of the modifications of the Chick-Watson Law incorporate explicit dependence on initial microbial density. In this study, a series of inactivation experiments were conducted with Escherichia coli cultured under three different growth conditions to investigate cell density effects on inactivation. Cell density dependent inactivation was observed in E. coli cultures grown on nutrient agar slant overnight and grown in chemostat with hydraulic residence time of 110 h. The disinfection efficiency was significantly (P &lt; 0.05) greater at higher initial microbial density. Inactivation of E. coli cultured in nutrient broth for only 3 h was independent of cell density. These results have a major significance for utilities in terms of optimization of the disinfection process and balancing the risks associated with exposure to pathogens and disinfection/disinfectant byproducts.

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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.190
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207