MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342537569 · doi:10.3390/w8050183

Performance of a Constructed Wetland and Pretreatment System Receiving Potato Farm Wash Water

2016· article· en· W2342537569 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vera Bosak, Andrew VanderZaag, Anna Crolla, Chris Kinsley, Robert J. Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphWilfrid Laurier UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWetlandAerationWastewaterTotal suspended solidsSewage treatmentConstructed wetlandPhosphorusSedimentationSuspended solidsBiochemical oxygen demandEnvironmental engineeringHydrology (agriculture)Animal scienceSedimentChemistryChemical oxygen demandEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many potato processors require on-farm washing of potatoes, creating large quantities of wastewater that requires treatment, starting in the fall until the end of the potato storage period in mid-summer. We studied the treatment of wastewater from a potato farm in Ontario, Canada, using a system of pretreatment (sedimentation, aeration) followed by a surface-flow wetland with a dense growth of cattails (Typha sp.). The raw wastewater had high average concentrations of 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5; 1113 mg·L−1), total suspended solids (TSS; 4338 mg·L−1), total nitrogen (TN; 311 mg·L−1) and total phosphorus (TP; 42.5 mg·L−1). Due to high influent loads, the pretreatment was enlarged during annual sediment cleaning at the end of Year 1 (Y1), which increased the hydraulic retention time and delayed the seasonal onset of wetland loading from winter in Y1 to spring in Year 2 (Y2). Total concentration reduction for the treatment system (pretreatment + wetland) in Y2 was 96% BOD5, 99% TSS, 86% TN and 90% TP; and in Y1 was 79% BOD5, 97% TSS, 62% TN and 54% TP. Overall, the best treatment in both the pretreatment and the wetland was seen in spring months. The enlarged pretreatment system enabled seasonal loading of the wetland during the spring and summer, which facilitated improved treatment performance.

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 score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207