Total Dissolved Gas Pressure Measurements for Assessing Contaminant Degradation Processes in Groundwater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The total dissolved gas pressure ( P TDG ) probe has been used in groundwater studies for over a decade, but rarely in assessing contaminant degradation, despite the many degradation reactions that produce or consume dissolved gases. Here we present three studies to demonstrate the application of P TDG measurements to groundwater experiencing contaminant degradation, with discussion of its benefits and limitations. The first study is a pilot‐scale laboratory experiment simulating dissolved ethanol contamination of an anaerobic sand aquifer. Continuous monitoring of P TDG showed the rapid onset of microbial hydrocarbon degradation via denitrification and fermentation. The subsequent formation of a gas phase was revealed when P TDG began mimicking the bubbling pressure ( P G *; sum of hydrostatic and atmospheric pressure), fluctuating with atmospheric pressure. Some deviations of P TDG above P G * occurred also, which may hold promise for signalling substantial changes in the rate or type of degradation process (here, the onset of methanogenesis). In the second study, synoptic field measurements at a petroleum plume site demonstrated how elevated P TDG could identify wells with evidence of hydrocarbon degradation (denitrification and/or methanogenesis). And finally, combined field measurements of dissolved oxygen (DO) and P TDG in monitoring wells of a nitrate‐contaminated aquifer (Abbottsford‐Sumas) revealed areas where denitrification was likely occurring. Limitations to P TDG use identified in these studies included the masking of degradation processes by the presence of a gas phase, as when trapped following water table fluctuations or formed from rigorous degradation reactions, and confounded assessment of P TDG patterns from other natural or anthropogenic processes that can also influence groundwater P TDG .
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".