Comparative Effects of Non-Composted and Composted Sewage Sludge from Wastewater Treatment Plants on the Physiological and Antioxidative Responses of Maize
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the physiological and antioxidative responses of maize to non-composted (NCSS) and composted sewage sludge (CSS) from Debrecen and Kecskemét, applied at 25%, 50%, and 75% (m/m) concentrations. Measurements were taken 21 and 35 days after sowing (DAS). Debrecen NCSS significantly enhanced plant height at all concentrations and at both sampling times, while higher doses of Kecskemét NCSS reduced growth by 35 DAS. Chlorophyll-a, chlorophyll-b, and carotenoid contents were notably enhanced by Kecskemét treatments, especially at lower concentrations, whereas Debrecen treatments showed less effect. Photosystem II (PSII) efficiency parameters varied with origin: Kecskemét NCSS notably increased minimal fluorescence (Fo), while Debrecen CSS occasionally reduced maximum fluorescence (Fm) and variable fluorescence (Fv) at 75% dose (21 DAS). The superoxide dismutase activity (SOD) was significantly elevated in Kecskemét treatments—by 101%, 148% and 149% at 25%, 50% and 75% CSS applications. Correlation analysis further highlighted that NCSS treatments often showed negative associations between plant height and chlorophyll content but positive correlations with antioxidant activity. In contrast, CSS treatments promoted balanced physiological responses. The results support the importance of sludge origin and application rate and suggest that composted sludge can be a safe, sustainable amendment when managed appropriately.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".