MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6925913019 · doi:10.20078/j.eep.20241102

Occurrence and Reduction of Emerging Pollutants in the Process of Organic Solid Waste Recycling

2025· article· en· W6925913019 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMicrobial Natural Products and Biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutantMunicipal solid wasteBiodegradable wasteBioconversionAnaerobic digestionResource recoveryVermicompostWaste treatment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various emerging pollutants have been detected in organic solid waste in recent years, posing a significant threat to the environment and human health due to biotoxicity, environmental persistence, and bioaccumulation. Organic solid waste bioconversion (aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion) is a crucial method for resource utilization and mitigating emerging pollutants. However, there is a lack of systematic summarization and understanding of the characteristics of different emerging pollutants in the bioconversion of organic solid waste and their degradation pathways. Based on a literature review, this paper summarizes the current research status of typical emerging pollutants in the process of organic solid waste resource utilization, including persistent organic pollutants, endocrine disruptors, antibiotics, and microplastics. It analyzes the characteristics of emerging pollutants in different types of organic solid wastes (food waste, municipal sludge, and livestock manure). It also explores the effects of aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion on removing these pollutants and the strategies for improving removal efficiency. Overall, the average concentration of endocrine disruptors in organic solid waste (23158 μg/kg) is higher than that of antibiotics (12418 μg/kg) and persistent organic pollutants (1268 μg/kg), with the average concentration of microplastics being 34 703 particles/kg. Antibiotics, used as antimicrobial agents and growth promoters, are currently the most studied emerging contaminants, primarily concentrated in livestock manure, where their concentrations are also higher. Research on persistent organic pollutants, endocrine disruptors, and microplastics, which are produced by industrial activities and daily human life, is mainly focused on municipal sludge, where their concentrations are also higher. Municipal sludge and livestock manure carrying emerging pollutants may migrate into crops after land application, thereby contaminating food and derived food waste. Currently, there is relatively little research on emerging pollutants in food waste and its treatment. A review of the literature reveals that research on emerging pollutants in the resource utilization process of organic solid waste spans 33 countries. China is the country with the most research on emerging contaminants (accounting for 72%, which may be related to the number of universities), followed by the United States, Poland, Spain, Canada, and Australia. Research on emerging pollutants is predominantly focused on anaerobic digestion, though there are regional differences. For example, regions such as Shanghai, Hunan, and Jiangsu in China, as well as some foreign countries, primarily focus on anaerobic digestion, while regions like Heilongjiang, Henan, and Guangdong in China mainly focus on aerobic composting. The bioconversion of organic solid waste can effectively control and reduce emerging pollutants in organic solid waste, with aerobic composting generally showing higher capabilities for removing emerging pollutants compared to anaerobic digestion. Finally, further research directions regarding emerging pollutants in organic solid waste resource utilization are discussed to guide subsequent work.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicMicrobial Natural Products and Biosynthesis→French-language works237,207→