MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414847268 · doi:10.1080/15226514.2025.2566936

Phytogenic TiO <sub>2</sub> –biochar nanocomposite derived from <i>Prunus dulcis</i> for enhanced Rhodamine B removal from aqueous systems

2025· article· en· W4414847268 on OpenAlexaff
James F. Amaku, Ifeoma Anne Omobhude, Okoche Kelvin Amadi, Tunde L. Yusuf, Fanyana M. Mtunzi, Jesse Greener

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Phytoremediation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
FundersNational Research Foundation
KeywordsAdsorptionRhodamine BAqueous solutionBiocharFreundlich equationNanocompositeWastewater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Batch adsorption experiments were carried out to evaluate the removal of Rhodamine B (RhB), a cationic dye, from synthetic wastewater using a multi-walled carbon nanotube/titanium dioxide (MWCNT/TiO2)-modified biochar composite (CBTM), with pristine biochar (CCB) as a reference. The effects of solution pH, contact time, adsorbent dosage, temperature, and initial dye concentration on adsorption performance were systematically investigated. Maximum RhB removal occurred at pH 3, with equilibrium achieved after 180 min. Under these conditions, CBTM exhibited a higher adsorption capacity (31.43 mg·g−1) than CCB (17.31 mg·g−1) at 313 K. Equilibrium data were best described by the Freundlich isotherm, indicating multilayer adsorption on heterogeneous surfaces, while kinetic analysis showed that the pseudo-first-order model provided the most accurate fit, suggesting a physisorption-dominated process. Thermodynamic parameters (ΔG°, ΔH°, ΔS°) confirmed that the adsorption was spontaneous and endothermic. Interestingly, while CBTM demonstrated superior dye removal, antimicrobial assays revealed stronger bacterial inhibition by CCB. These results highlight the potential of CBTM for efficient dye removal and underscore the multifunctional capabilities of biochar-based adsorbents.

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 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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 venueInternational Journal of PhytoremediationSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207