MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231023677 · doi:10.5194/bg-2017-517

Improving the Strength of Sandy Soils via Ureolytic CaCO <sub>3</sub> Solidification by <i>Sporosarcina ureae</i>

2018· preprint· en· W4231023677 on OpenAlexaff
Justin Whitaker, Sai K. Vanapalli, Danielle Fortin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Applications in Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcium carbonateChemistryUreaCalciteEnvironmental chemistryCarbonateHydrolysisPrecipitationNuclear chemistryMineralogyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

Abstract. Microbial induced carbonate precipitation (MICP) is a biogeochemical process that can be applied to strengthen materials. The hydrolysis of urea by microbial catalysis to form carbonate is a commonly studied example of MICP. In this study, Sporosarcina ureae, a ureolytic organism, was compared to other ureolytic and non-ureolytic organisms of Bacillus and Sporosarcina in the assessment of its ability to produce carbonates by ureolytic MICP for ground reinforcement. It was found that S. ureae grew optimally in alkaline (pH ~ 9.0) conditions which favoured MICP and could degrade urea (30.28 U/mL) at levels similar to S. pasteurii (32.76 U/mL), the model ureolytic MICP organism. When cells of S. ureae were concentrated (OD600 ~ 15–20) and mixed with cementation medium containing 0.5 M calcium chloride (CaCl2) and urea into a model sand, repeated treatments (3 × 24 h) were able to improve the confined direct shear strength of samples from 15.77 kPa to as much as 135.8 kPa. This was more than any other organism observed in the study. Imaging of the reinforced samples with scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive spectroscopy confirmed the successful precipitation of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), organized as calcite, across sand particles by S. ureae. Treated samples were also tested experimentally according to model North American climatic conditions to understand the environmental durability of MICP. No significant (p

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Geotechnical microbiology on microbially induced carbonate precipitation to strengthen sandy soils; the object is a ground reinforcement process.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This materials-engineering study tests microbial soil strengthening, not research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Geotechnical/microbial soil solidification via MICP; environmental engineering domain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial Applications in Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207