Cultivation of an Algae-Bacteria Consortium in a Mixture of Industrial Wastewater to Obtain Valuable Products for Local Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Profitability of biofuel production from microalgae is difficult to achieve but co-locating production with wastewater treatment plants is a possible avenue help to reduce costs. A microalgae culturing project was conducted using wastewater from an industrial park to obtain valuable metabolites from the biomass to eventually use them locally. Different growth conditions were tested with a mixture of wastewater as the culture medium and a native microalgae-bacteria consortium isolated locally. The results showed that this consortium grows well in wastewater and that different fatty acids profiles are produced under the different growth conditions. The optimal culture conditions to produce biomass and extracted lipids are in mixotrophic mode under an irradiance of 200 μmol m−2 s−1 with an injection of 1% of CO2. High amounts of other fatty acids were also produced and could potentially be used to make other co-products. In addition to reducing wastewater treatment costs, the manufacture of biosurfactants could bring additional income to the overall microalgae production process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".