MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736324048 · doi:10.20381/ruor-15844

Treatment of 2,4-dichlorophenol using soybean peroxidase.

2000· dissertation· en· W2736324048 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin Michael. Alemany

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDye analysis and toxicity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
Keywords2,4-DichlorophenolPeroxidaseChemistryBiologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the presence of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), soybean peroxidase (SBP) extracted from the soybean seed coat catalyzes the polymerization of various chlorinated phenols from wastewater. The resulting polymer precipitates from solution and can be removed through a simple sedimentation or filtration process. To date, the majority of the research has focused on horseradish peroxidase (HRP) as the enzyme source. Recently, researchers have discovered that SBP is thermally more stable and can work in a different pH range than HRP. Since the soybean seedcoat is a waste product of the soybean industry, developing a value-added process to utilize the waste would be economical. Several limitations need to be resolved prior to this enzymatic process becoming a legitimate treatment. For instance, peroxidase enzyme (PE) inactivation is a primary concern in trying to make the process more viable. Researchers have postulated that the PE is inactivated by entrapment into the forming polymers. To prevent such occurrences, high molecular weight substance such as gelatin and polyethylene glycol (PEG) have been added to solution. PEG 8000 provides a significant increase in protection compared to PEG 3350, a standard additive used for HRP. To date, researchers studying SBP as an alternative to HRP have focused mostly on the treatment of phenol. The effectiveness of SBP to treat chlorinated phenols is presented in this research. Some of the parameters studied include the effects and interactions of temperature, reaction time, pH, SBP concentration, PEG molecular weight, PEG concentration, type of substrate, substrate concentration, mode of substrate addition, mode of SBP addition and mode of H2O 2 addition. SBP was found to be a suitable alternative to HRP offer similar results and in some cases, improved the results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.161 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicDye analysis and toxicityFrench-language works237,207