MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407274760 · doi:10.1101/2025.02.07.637154

The effect of feeding on microbiome and biogas composition in anaerobic CSTR

2025· preprint· en· W4407274760 on OpenAlexaff
Georgios Samiotis, Manthos Panou, Vassiliki Tsioni, Themistoklis Sfetsas

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContinuous stirred-tank reactorBiogasAnaerobic exerciseComposition (language)MicrobiomeChemistryFood scienceBiologyEcologyPhysiologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract his study investigates the performance of two Continuous Stirred Tank Reactors (CSTRs) with a focus on biogas yield, physicochemical parameters, and microbial dynamics. By integrating experimental observations with insights from recent literature, the research aims to elucidate the intricate relationships between reactor conditions, microbiome composition, and biogas production efficiency. Two substrates were used: a control substrate (SB1) and a protein-rich test substrate (SB2). The study monitored key parameters such as pH, Total Alkalinity of Carbonates (TAC), and volatile fatty acids (FOS), and analyzed the microbial communities using high-throughput sequencing. Results indicated significant temporal variations in pH, TAC, and nitrogen levels, with a declining FOS/TAC ratio. The introduction of SB2 led to increased biogas production and methane content, particularly at higher Hydraulic Retention Times (HRT). The study also high-lighted the role of specific microbial taxa in enhancing biogas quality. These findings contribute to the development of optimized strategies for sustainable biogas production and process control.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207