Ciprofloxacin Removal from Aqueous Media Using Floating Treatment Wetlands Supported by Immobilized Bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The unwanted occurrence of antibiotics in the environment is an emerging concern of non-target toxicity and antimicrobial resistance. Floating treatment wetland (FTW) is a low-cost and ecofriendly wastewater remediation strategy; however, the effect of immobilized bacteria on its efficacy during the remediation of ciprofloxacin (CIP)-contaminated water has not been documented. In this study, Phragmites australis was planted to develop FTW, and it was augmented with a bacterial consortium (Acinetobacter lwoffii ACRH76, Bacillus pumulis C2A1, and Acinetobacter sp. HN3), with and without immobilization for the remediation of CIP-contaminated (100 mg L−1) water. The augmentation of bacteria (immobilized or in suspension) in the FTWs significantly increased the elimination of CIP from the water. Maximum removal of CIP (97%), COD (92%), BOD (93%), and TOC (90%) from the water was observed in the FTWs having immobilized bacteria. This research revealed that the FTWs have tremendous potential to remove the CIP from the water and its removal efficiency can be enhanced via immobilized bacterial augmentation strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".