MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324105415 · doi:10.1021/es3043802

Investigation of Hydrophobic Organic Carbon (HOC) Partitioning to 1 kDa Fractionated Municipal Wastewater Colloids

2013· article· en· W2324105415 on OpenAlexafffund
Kerry N. McPhedran, Rajesh Seth, Ken G. Drouillard

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryEnvironmental chemistryPartition coefficientEffluentTotal organic carbonWastewaterCarbon fibersSorbentOrganic matterChromatographyOrganic chemistryAdsorptionEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural organic matter from the aquatic environment passing a 1 kDa filter has been hypothesized to not contribute appreciably to hydrophobic organic compound (HOC) partitioning; however, to our knowledge this limit has not been verified experimentally for any sorbate/sorbent system. Presently, colloidal organic carbon (COC) < 1 kDa approached 70% of the total COC (<1.5 μm) mass in primary effluent (PE) from a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Partitioning of HOCs 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene, pentachlorobenzene, and hexachlorobenzene to COC for both 1.5 μm and 1 kDa filtrates of PE was investigated using the gas-stripping technique. Contrary to the hypothesis, significant HOC-COC partitioning to the 1 kDa filtrate was observed with organic carbon-normalized partitioning coefficients (logKCOC) of 4.30, 4.36, and 3.74 for 1,2,4,5-TeCB, PeCB, and HCB, respectively. Further, partitioning to COC < 1 kDa dominated the overall partitioning of the three chlorobenzenes in the 1.5 μm filtrate, and the partitioning behavior did not follow the trend based on hydrophobicity (KOW). The results show that significant partitioning of HOC may occur to OC < 1 kDa and highlights the need for further experiments with other HOCs and COC characterization to better understand and explain the observed partitioning.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207