Towards Sustainable Application of Wastewater in Agriculture: A Review on Reusability and Risk Assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of marginal-quality waters, not limited to brackish/saline and treated sewage effluent (TSE), is called reclaimed water. Reclaimed water is a sustainable source in the future for use in agriculture, essentially required to offset the food demand of a rapidly growing population. Moreover, the sustainable recovery of reclaimed water is essential for humanity to satisfy extreme sanitation and water-supply demands. To increase access to water supply, alternate water resources’ use, existing water resources’ degradation, and improved water-use efficiency are imperative. There is a high potential to address these factors by using reclaimed water as an alternative source. The reclaimed water treated at a tertiary level has the potential for use in crop production, especially for forage crops, irrigating urban landscapes, recreational and environmental activities, industry, and aquifer recharge to increase strategic water reserves in water-scarce countries. This way, we can save precious freshwater that can be utilized for other purposes. Eminently, freshwater applications for industrial and agronomic sectors account for 20% and 67%, respectively, depleting freshwater resources. The use of reclaimed water in agriculture can significantly reduce pressure on freshwater. However, if the quality of reclaimed water does not comply with international standards, it may cause serious health risks (diseases) and soil pollution (heavy metals).
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it