A Kinetic Uptake Study of Roxarsone Using Cross-Linked Chitosan Beads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adsorptive behavior of chitosan bead materials with roxarsone (ROX) was studied using a fixed bed column and a one-pot setup to evaluate the kinetic and thermodynamic adsorption parameters. The role of variable surface chemical properties of chitosan beads on the adsorption properties with ROX was investigated using a dye-based method, contact angle measurements, powder X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, and atomic force microscopy. The equilibrium uptake ( q e; mg ROX/g sorbent) values are listed in ascending order: non-cross-linked chitosan bead (52.5 mg/g) < chitosan bead cross-linked with epichlorohydrin (89.1 mg/g) < chitosan bead cross-linked with glutaraldehyde (104 mg/g). The results agree with uptake values obtained using a fixed bed column, where cross-linked chitosan beads display relatively rapid ROX uptake (0.121 min –1 ) relative to that of the non-cross-linked chitosan bead (0.053 min –1 ). These observed trends can be understood according to the hydrophile–lipophile balance and pore structure properties of cross-linked chitosan beads. The column bed removal efficiency (65.2%) increased for chitosan beads cross-linked with glutaraldehyde as the packed bed adsorbent material.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".