MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404044755 · doi:10.2166/wpt.2024.276

A universal empirical equation to estimate the abundance of carbapenem-resistant genes during aerobic digestion of wastewater sludge

2024· article· en· W4404044755 on OpenAlex
Eskandar Poorasgari, Banu Örmeci

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Practice & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)WastewaterDigestion (alchemy)Sewage treatmentActivated sludgeWaste managementChemistryPulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceBiologyChromatographyEnvironmental engineeringEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Carbapenem-resistant genes (CRGs) exist in wastewater and accumulate in wastewater sludge. Due to the potential threat posed by the CRGs, it is important to quantify CRGs and predict their removal and discharge concentrations during aerobic sludge digestion. Nonetheless, gene quantification is tedious, error-prone and expensive. This study aims to develop multiple regression models to estimate CRGs from sludge parameters that are routinely measured for the monitoring and design of aerobic sludge digesters. Batch reactors were operated at mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures for 20-35 days. Sludge samples were periodically taken during aerobic digestion. Three CRGs (blaGES, blaOXA-48 and blaIMP-27) together with 16S rRNA and integron class 1 genes were quantified. Aerobic digestion reduced the abundance of all target genes. Multiple regression modelling was conducted in linear (LM) and non-linear (NLM) modes. Sums of squared errors of the LM models were 0-0.048, whereas those of the NLM models were 0–0.003. Adjusted R2 ranges of the LM and NLM models were 0.774–0.931 and 0.986–1, respectively. Overall, the NLM models predicted the abundance of target genes more accurately than the LM models. NLM models may be used to modify the design and operational parameters of aerobic sludge digesters.

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 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 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.302 · 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