Characteristics of different fractions of microbial flocs and their role in membrane fouling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characteristics of different fractions (small flocs vs. large flocs) of sludge flocs from a submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactor treating thermomechanical pulping (TMP) whitewater were determined using various analytic techniques, including extraction and chemical analysis of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), particle size analyzer, and polymer chain reaction (PCR)-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE). The results showed that the fraction of smaller flocs contained a higher level of bound EPS and had a higher fractal dimension as compared to the fraction of larger flocs. PCR-DGGE analysis indicated that there were significant differences in microbial community between the fraction of smaller flocs and large flocs. The microbial community of the smaller flocs was similar to that of the sludge cake layers, indicating the pioneering role of the microbial community in smaller flocs in membrane fouling. These findings provide a new insight in the difference of membrane fouling potential between smaller flocs and larger flocs fraction.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".