MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409197903 · doi:10.1016/j.wsee.2025.03.007

Performance assessment of personal care products industrial effluent treatment plant and its impacts on the environment

2025· article· en· W4409197903 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Md. Anowar Hossen, M. G. Mostafa

Bibliographic record

VenueWatershed Ecology and the Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRajshahi UniversityBangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
KeywordsPersonal careEffluentBusinessEnvironmental scienceWaste managementEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• The WWTP was very poorly managed, which could reduce only 15.5% of COD and 24.4% of BOD 5 . • The discharged effluent contained several EDCs along with heavy metals. • Demonstrated the effects of ionic product and solubility product constant, pH, and complexation on the performance of WWTP. • Conceptualized a new phosphate recovery process from sludge. Personal care products (PCPs) are emerging pollutants (EPs) that are capable of inducing adverse physiological effects on human health. PCPs industries generate a large volume of EPs that pose a significant threat to the aquatic environment. This study assessed PCPs industrial wastewater for physicochemical parameters, EPs, heavy metals (HMs), and the removal efficiency of a biochemical wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) in three different seasons. The study also assessed the environmental impacts using several indices, such as the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment water quality index ( CCME-WQI ), heavy metal pollution index ( HPI ), heavy metal evaluation index ( HEI ), and risk quotients index ( RQ s). The analysis results showed that the WWTP could reduce only 15.5 % and 24.4 % of COD and BOD 5 , respectively, leaving a very high value of 468.3 and 249.9 mg/L, respectively, compared to the ECR (2023 ) standard. The removal rates for the HMs were in the order of Mn (5.7 %) < Cr (10.4 %) < Zn (20.0 %) < Ni (23.5 %) < Cd (59.4 %) < Cu (61.9 %) < Fe (73.1 %) < Pb (88.7 %). The discharged effluent contained a number of EPs and HMs, which were poor in quality, unsafe for consumption, and high in environmental risk. Acidic pH and low phosphate concentration in the biological process were found to be the key determining factors for the worst performance of the WWTP, though metal–ligand interaction was assumed to have some contribution. The phosphate recovery concept formulated in this study is assumed to be simple and straight-forward. The study argued that if some important parameters, such as pH, phosphate concentration, etc. are maintained properly, the studied biochemical treatment process can be effective for removing both PCPs and HMs.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWatershed Ecology and the EnvironmentSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207