Reduction of Photoreactivation with the Combined UV/Peracetic Acid Process or by Delayed Exposure to Visible Light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photoreactivation of microorganisms following UV inactivation is a well-known, but complex, phenomenon. It is affected by several factors, including UV fluence, wavelength, light intensity, and exposure time to photoreactivating light. The effect on photoreactivation of a combined peracetic acid (PAA)/UV process has not been investigated. Accordingly, this study compared the degree of photoreactivation, under both sunlight and artificial lights, following UV and combined PAA/UV inactivation of fecal coliforms. Effluent samples from the Montreal Wastewater Treatment Plant (MWTP) (Quebec, Canada) were exposed, for 3 hours, to both low- and high-intensity artificial lights and sunlight. All resulted in similar photoreactivation levels. However, average photoreactivation for UV-treated wastewater samples was 1.2 logs, compared with 0.1 log for the combined PAA/UV treatment. Hence, the use of PAA in combination with UV can significantly reduce the potential for photoreactivation. To simulate the photoreactivation conditions of the MWTP effluent (which passes through a 4-km outfall tunnel with approximately 3 hours detention time), UV-treated samples were kept in the dark for 3 hours before photoreactivating light exposure. After this period, photoreactivation levels were close to zero. Hence, the effects of photoreactivation may be diminished by use of a combined disinfection scheme and/or by delaying exposure of the disinfected wastewater to light.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".