Concentration, Temperature and Storage duration Influence Chemical Stability of Compost Tea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical stability is one of the key quality control criterion for complex degradable materials with an active microbial community like compost tea, but largely understudied. A laboratory study was performed to assess the chemical stability of varying concentrations (0, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 50 and 100%) of municipal solid waste (MSW) compost tea stored at different temperatures (4°, 10°, 22° and 35°C) and storage time (0, 13, 26 39 and 52 days). A 2-dimension principal component biplot confirmed close relationship amongst total dissolved solids (TDS), electric conductivity (EC) and salinity while pH was less related and turbidity was isolated. TDS in the MSW compost tea did not change at a storage temperature of 4oC or 10oC but was significantly (P<0.05) increased by 4.3% when the storage temperature was raised to 35oC. Also, TDS increased sharply from 93.25 mg/L on day 1 to 111.31 mg/L on day 26 after which it remained unchanged. EC increased by approximately 8% only when the MSW compost tea was stored at 35oC. The EC on the other hand increased by 19.4% from 131.28 µS/cm on day 1 when it peaked on day 26 and plateaued off to day 52. The change in pH was small and ranged from 7.44 to 7.67. Concentration had the strongest association with TDS, EC, salinity and turbidity and did not vary with storage time nor temperature. A multilinear regression (Y = αD + βC + γT + k) showed significant (P<0.05) coefficients for all the independent variables except the coefficients for temperature in the turbidity, salinity and pH regression models. In conclusion, the chemical stability of the MSW compost tea was dependent on the storage temperature and storage duration. Chemical stability was reached after 26 days of storage while cold storage at 4oC or 10oC reduced chemical alteration.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".