Influence of Elevated CO<sub>2</sub> and Municipal Wastewater Feed on the Productivity, Morphology, and Chemical Composition of <i>Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, a marine strain of Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis (CCMP1925) was submitted to high concentrations of municipal wastewater (WW) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). Under standard conditions (Zarrouk medium and optimal light), production reached 2.79 g/kg of culture after 8 days. Adding wastewater to the mixture led to an increased cell density reaching 3.29 g/kg below 40% wastewater, while above 40%, wastewater was shown to inhibit productivity. At an elevated CO 2 concentration fed to the mixture, production reached 3.55 g/kg, although increasing the concentration of CO 2 above 2% (v/v) was shown to inhibit the production of biomass. High concentrations of combined wastewater and CO 2 were generally shown to be detrimental for the production of algal biomass. However, some synergetic effects were observed for the optimal cell density that was obtained after 5 days for a mixture involving 40% wastewater and 8% CO 2, while after 8 days, the best results were obtained with a 40% WW mixture and 0% CO 2 . A combination of elevated CO 2 and WW concentration (8% and 80%, respectively) led to poor cell growth, although the concentration in proteins, carbohydrates, and chlorophyll was generally higher when compared to the control cultures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".