MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152513362 · doi:10.1139/l08-117

Co-composting of manure with fat, oil, and grease: Microbial fingerprinting and phytotoxicity evaluation

2009· article· en· W2152513362 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nayef Z. Al-Mutairi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicComposting and Vermicomposting Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKuwait University
KeywordsCompostAmendmentGerminationManurePhytotoxicityVermicompostGreaseEnvironmental scienceMicrobial population biologyAgronomyPulp and paper industryChemistryNutrientBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sole carbon source utilization profiles to characterize compost maturity were evaluated in reference to several other physicochemical and biological maturity indices. The results suggested that the addition of fat, oil, and grease (FOG) had a significant effect on the biological processes in the sample piles when compared to the control pile. Additionally, principal components analysis of the patterns and the levels of microbial activity indicate that microbial communities differentiate in response to FOG additions from 1 to 20 L/m 3 . However, between 10 and 20 L/m 3 , no recognizable differences were found between the control and the FOG amendment communities. Biolog data indicates a shift in the structure and function of the microbial community in compost with high FOG additions, which may be a useful indicator of high functional diversity and evenness during composting processes. Finally, the germination index (GI) of lettuce increased from 9% in the control to 100% in the FOG amended compost. However, the addition of high amounts of FOG might in turn inhibit seed germination and root growth because of the high pH and electrical conductivity (EC), and the volatilization of NH 3 . From the present results, 10 L/m 3 was found to be the optimum FOG amendment rate for manure compost. These amendment rates are empirical and may be regarded as potential guidelines to agricultural practitioners.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicComposting and Vermicomposting TechniquesFrench-language works237,207