MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Production of biochar for treatment of retting effluents and utilization of spent biochar as potential germination medium for leafy greens

2024· article· en· W4399237360 on OpenAlexafffund
Neha Batta, Spencer M. Heuchan, Jessica Stokes-Rees, César M. Moreira, Franco Berruti

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomass and Bioenergy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicUrban Agriculture and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiocharGerminationRettingEffluentLeafyEnvironmental scienceAgronomyPulp and paper industryChemistryBotanyBiologyPyrolysisEnvironmental engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biochar has been found to be suitable for a wide array of applications. However, the repurpose of spent biochar has been far less explored. In this study, we utilized biochar as a pH treatment for wastewater effluent obtained from the pineapple fibre retting process and then used the spent biochar as a growth substrate media in place of commercially and non-reusable substrates, such as peat and rockwool. Biochar produced from wheat straw was used to treat the effluent which was then characterized for macro and micronutrient content. Treatment of effluent with biochar increased the micronutrients in the effluent, such as the iron content by 10-fold and the manganese content by 5-fold. The biochar treated wastewater effluent from the pineapple fibre retting was used as hydroponic medium to grow basil and arugula. The spent biochar was subsequently used as a growth substrate medium as a replacement for rockwool and peat. Initial tests showed successful germination for basil and arugula.

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 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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBiomass and BioenergySame topicUrban Agriculture and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207