MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198287576 · doi:10.1002/wer.1636

Methods of pretreatment and their impacts on anaerobic codigestion of multifeedstocks: A review

2021· review· en· W3198287576 on OpenAlexaff
Anahita Rabii, E. Hosseini Koupaie, Saad Aldin, Yaser Dahman, Elsayed Elbeshbishy

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnaerobic digestionRaw materialBiodegradationBiogasAnaerobic exerciseWaste managementPulp and paper industryBiochemical engineeringChemistryEngineeringMethaneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anaerobic codigestion (AnCoD) has attracted attention owing to its advantages over conventional anaerobic digestion, and attempts are still going on to develop methods for improving the efficiency of this technology. Mostly, addition of cosubstrates without applying a proper pretreatment cannot adequately enhance the performance of the digestion. However, there is a lack of a comprehensive study on different pretreatment methods specific to the wide range of cosubstrates. This review aimed to (i) categorize pretreatment techniques that have been developed for improving AnCoD, (ii) present the results of the studies on the effect of pretreatment on improving AnCoD, and (iii) provide a comparison between pretreatment methods and their application for different types of cosubstrates. The findings primarily validated the influence of pretreatment to enhance the process by increasing biodegradability, improved hydrolysis, reduced hydraulic retention time (HRT), and improved methane production. The five main categories of pretreatment employed in codigestion included the following: mechanical, thermal, chemical, biological, and hybrid pretreatment. Among them, mechanical and biological pretreatment have the most and least application in codigestion, respectively. Greater efforts are required on the application of biological pretreatment and cost-benefit analysis of different pretreatment options on the variety of the cosubstrates. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Pretreatment can significantly enhance biomethane production in anaerobic digestion Anaerobic codigestion along with pretreatment can further enhance the conventional anaerobic digestion of single feedstock Mechanical and biological methods have been the most and least practiced pretreatment options Selection of applicable pretreatment option to enhance methane production is subject to the type of cosubstrates in the system There is a research gap in evaluating the application of biological pretreatment for various types of cosubstrates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Environment ResearchSame topicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionFrench-language works237,207