Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Cow Manure and Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME): Assessment of Methane Production and Biodegradation Efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of anaerobic co-digestion of cow manure and POME was evaluated. The anaerobic composting process was carried out by using semi-continuous reactors under the mesophilic condition (35 ± 1℃). The addition of POME to the on-going anaerobic composting of cow manure was applied stepwise within a cycle of HRT (20 days). Results showed that the anaerobic co-digestion reactor could produce methane at about six times higher (7.2 L CH4) than the control reactor (1.3 L CH4). An increasing of POME loaded to the on-going anaerobic composting cow manure culture (4% to 64%) did not affect pH of the culture in which pH was still stable between 7.11 and 7.5. Assessment of biodegradation efficiency revealed that nitrogen removal of the anaerobic co-digestion reactor was six times higher (21%) than the nitrogen removal of the control reactor (3.4%). This suggested that the anaerobic co-digestion reactor performed sufficiently well in which no organic acid as well as ammonia accumulated in the reactor that could be effective to decompose the organic matters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".