Dual effects of a dispersant and nutrient supplementation on weathered Endicott oil biodegradation in seawater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory-scale experiments were conducted to evaluate the biodegradation of physically (WAF) and chemically dispersed (CEWAF) Endicott oil in seawater (salinity: 29.1‰) from Prince William Sound, Alaska, under low nutrient (LN) (background seawater) and high nutrient (HN) (addition of 100 mg NO3-N/L and 10 mg PO4-P/L to background seawater) at 15 ± 0.5 °C for 42 days. The dispersant was Corexit 9500. The dispersed oil concentration of the WAF (0.019 g/L ± 0.002) was an order of magnitude lower than that in the CEWAF (0.363 g/L ± 0.038). While remaining negligible in the WAF, the total oil removal in the CEWAF was 26% and 44% in LN and HN treatments, respectively. Nutrient supplementation significantly accelerated the rate of oil biodegradation as confirmed by ANOVA coupled with Tukey’s test at 95% confidence intervals (α = 0.05). GC/MS analyses revealed that biodegradation affected mainly alkane compounds. In the CEWAF, O2 consumption, CO2 production and biomass were much larger in HN than in LN treatments, which suggests that chemical dispersion of oil coupled with high nutrient concentration could be very useful in terms of remediation strategies and effective responses to oil spill at sea.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".