MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154377274 · doi:10.1080/03601234.2014.938561

Corrosion and stability study of<i>Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki</i>starch industry wastewater-derived biopesticide formulation

2014· article· en· W2154377274 on OpenAlexaff
Jean R. Gnepe, R. D. Tyagi, Satinder Kaur Brar, José R. Lerma Valero, Rao Y. Surampalli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part B · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrophoretic Deposition in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopesticideZeta potentialNuclear chemistryBacillus thuringiensisCorrosionMaterials scienceChemistryChromatographyMetallurgyPesticideBiologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biopesticides are usually sprayed on forests by using planes made up of aluminum alloy. Bioval derived from starch industry wastewater (SIW) in suspension form was developed as stable anticorrosive biopesticide formulation. In this context, various anticorrosion agents such as activated charcoal, glycerin, ethylene glycol, phytic acid, castor oil and potassium silicate were tested as anticorrosive agents. There was no corrosion found in Bioval formulation where potassium silicate (0.5% w/v) was added and compared with Foray 76 B, as an industrial standard, when stored over 6 months. In relation to other parameters, the anticorrosion formulation of Bioval+buffer+KSi reported excellent zeta potential (-33.19 ± 4 mV) and the viscosity (319.13 ± 32 mPa.s) proving it's stability over 6 months, compared to the standard biopesticide Foray 76 B (-36.62 ± 4 mV potential zeta, pH 4.14 ± 0.1 and 206 ± 21 mPa.s viscosity). Metal analysis of the different biopesticides showed that Bioval+buffer+KSi has no corrosion (5.11 ± 0.5 mg kg(-1) of Al and 13.53 ± 1.5 mg kg(-1) of Fe) on the aluminum alloy due to the contribution of sodium acetate buffer at pH 5. The bioassays reported excellent results for Bioval+Buffer+KSi (2.95 ± 0.3 × 10(9) CFU mL(-1) spores and 26.6 ± 2.7 × 10(9) IU L(-1) Tx) compared with initial Bioval (2.46 ± 0.3 × 10(9) CFU mL(-1) spores and 23.09 ± 3 × 10(9) IU L(-1) Tx) and Foray 76 B (2.3 ± 0.2 × 10(9) CFU mL(-1) spores and 19.950 ± 2.1 UI L(-1) Tx) which was due to the break-up of the external chitinous membrane due to abrasive action of potassium silicate after ingestion by insects. The contribution of sodium acetate buffer and potassium silicate (0.5% and at pH = 5) as anticorrosion agent in the Bioval allowed production of an efficient biopesticide with a reduced viscosity and favorable pH as compared to Foray 76 B which enhanced the entomotoxic potential against spruce budworm (SB) larvae (Lepidoptera: Choristoneura fumiferana).

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part BSame topicElectrophoretic Deposition in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207