MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376278338 · doi:10.3390/biotech12020036

Bioremediation of Organic Pollutants in Soil–Water System: A Review

2023· review· en· W4376278338 on OpenAlexaff
Pankaj Kumar Gupta, Manvi Gandhi

Bibliographic record

VenueBioTech · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioremediationPollutantEnvironmental sciencePhytoremediationPollutionWater pollutionBTEXSoil contaminationEnvironmental engineeringSoil waterContaminationWaste managementEnvironmental chemistryChemistryEcologyEngineeringSoil scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil-water pollution is of serious concern worldwide. There is a public outcry against the continually rising problems of pollution to ensure the safest and healthiest subsurface environment for living beings. A variety of organic pollutants causes serious soil-water pollution, toxicity and, therefore, the removal of a wide range of organic pollutants from contaminated matrix through the biological process rather than physico-chemical methods is an urgent need to protect the environment and public health. Being an ecofriendly technology, bioremediation can solve the problems of soil-water pollution due to hydrocarbons as it is a low-cost and self-driven process that utilises microorganisms and plants or their enzymes to degrade and detoxify pollutants and thus, promote sustainable development. This paper describes the updates on the bioremediation and phytoremediation techniques which have been recently developed and demonstrated at the plot-scale. Further, this paper provides details of wetland-based treatment of BTEX contaminated soils and water. The knowledge acquired in our study contributes extensively towards understanding the impact of dynamic subsurface conditions on engineered bioremediation techniques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioTechSame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207