MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410435925 · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138644

Artificial sweeteners in wastewater treatment plants: A systematic review of global occurrence, distribution, removal, and degradation pathways

2025· review· en· W4410435925 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hazardous Materials · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilAustralian Research CouncilAustralian Academy of Science
KeywordsArtificial SweetenerDegradation (telecommunications)WastewaterSewage treatmentEnvironmental scienceWaste managementDistribution (mathematics)ChemistryBiochemical engineeringEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringFood scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widespread use of artificial sweeteners in foods, drinks, and pharmaceuticals has led to rising concentrations in wastewater, with specific sweeteners raising concerns due to demonstrated toxicological risks to ecosystems and humans. To date, a comprehensive summary of the occurrence, distribution, and removal status of artificial sweeteners in wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) is lacking, making it difficult to evaluate the associated risks and environmental impacts. We conducted a systematic review of scientific literature and grey literature with rigorous screening covering 24 countries and 6 continents. Globally, sucralose, acesulfame, saccharin, and cyclamate are prevalent artificial sweeteners in WWTP, with concentrations of 0.6-303.0 µg/L in influent and 0.1-81.2 µg/L in effluent. Sucralose showed obvious increasing concentrations over time in wastewater in the United States and Canada, with an increase of 5.6-5.7 µg/L·y in influent and 4.7-5.5 µg/L·y in effluent. Summer wastewater usually contains 11.1-33.3 % higher concentrations of artificial sweeteners than other seasons. Saccharin and cyclamate are the most easily removable sweeteners (>90.0 % removal) in WWTP, followed by acesulfame (25.0-70.1 %) and sucralose (-10.0-10.0 %). Wastewater treatment processes with longer HRT and more diverse microbial communities showed better performance in sucralose removal, while processes with aerobic conditions showed better performance in acesulfame and saccharin removal than anaerobic processes. Increasing trends for persistent sucralose and acesulfame removal have been observed globally, suggesting potential microbial evolution/adaptation. This review contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the spatiotemporal distribution and ever-evolving biodegradation of artificial sweeteners in WWTP, providing future perspectives and potential policy requirements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.264 · 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