Removal of 2‐naphthoxyacetic acid from aqueous solution using quaternized chitosan beads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigates the use of quaternized chitosan hydrogels for the adsorption of an aromatic organic carboxylate, 2‐naphthoxyacetic acid (2‐NAA), to demonstrate the applicability of this type of adsorbent towards the removal of naphthenic acids (NAs) from oil sands process‐affected water (OSPW). The effects of varying three processing parameters on the physical and adsorption characteristics of the resulting adsorbents were investigated, namely the density, degree of cross‐linking, and degree of quaternization of the hydrogel beads. Their effects on the swelling behaviour and Langmuir adsorption capacity of 2‐NAA were reported. The Langmuir adsorption isotherm provided adequate fit for the equilibrium adsorption data (R2 ≥ 0.99), while the pseudo second order rate equation described the kinetic adsorption data quite well (R2 ≥ 0.95). The effects of adsorbate concentration, adsorbent dosage, agitation rate, ionic strength, pH, and temperature on the adsorption process were also studied. At the initial concentration of approximately 200 mg/L, up to 91 % of 2‐NAA was adsorbed. The best quaternized chitosan hydrogel adsorbents reported in this study possessed a maximum adsorption capacity of 315 mg/g.
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 | 0.000 | 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".