Evaluation of Ficus benjamina wood chip-based fungal biofiltration for the treatment of Tequila vinasses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study was focused on the application of an aerobic biofiltration (BF) with Ficus benjamina wood chips as support medium, inoculated with two basidiomycete fungi, Phanerochaete chrysosporium (BF 1) and Trametes versicolor (BF 2), to treat Tequila vinasses from a Tequila industry. The biofiltration system was compared with a biofilter system without basidiomycete fungi (BF W), in order to determine the influence of fungi on the treatment of vinasses. Three different vinasses/water ratios (30/70, 40/60, and 50/50) were evaluated. The maximum removals of chemical oxygen demand (COD) obtained during each operation step were 72% (BF 1), 72% (BF 2), and 8% (BF W) for 30 vinasses/70 water; 72% (BF 1), 73% (BF 2), and 66% (BF W) for 40 vinasses/60 water; and 22% (BF 1), 20% (BF 2), and 18% (BF W) for 50 vinasses/50 water. The total organic carbon (TOC) removal was significantly increased using a volumetric organic load of 5.5 kg COD m−3d−1. During the operation of the biofilters, the enzymatic activity of laccase was present, even at the step of highest concentration of vinasses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".