MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095120847

Disinfection of Bacillus subtilis spores with chlorine dioxide: a bench-scale and pilot-scale study

2001· article· en· W7095120847 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSporeBacillus subtilisChlorine dioxideCryptosporidium parvumChlorineEndosporeBacillalesWater treatment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chlorine dioxide (ClO2) inactivation of Bacillus subtilis ATCC 19659 spores was examined at pilot-scale during periods representative of winter and summer temperature extremes at the Britannia Water Treatment Plant in Ottawa, Canada. In addition, bench-scale experiments using the same source water (Ottawa River, Ontario, Canada), as well as buffered and unbuffered laboratory waters were conducted using B. subtilis spores. Bench-scale inactivation of B. subtilis spores by ClO2 was similar to reported values for Cryptosporidium parvum (both organisms being more resistant to ClO2 than Giardia lamblia), suggesting the possibility that these spores may be used as potential indicators for protozoan parasites. Additionally, spore inactivation was observed to be influenced by pH in laboratory (distilled deionised water) water but not in Ottawa River water. At pilot-scale, spore inactivation was influenced by water temperature: a ClO2 dose of 2.5mg/L resulted in a spore inactivation of approximately 2.0 log10 and 0.5 log10 at water temperatures of 23.21C and 5.21C, respectively. Chlorite concentrations remained below both the US EPA maximum contaminant level of 1.0mg/L and the maximum contaminant level goal of 0.8mg/L for up to 2.0 log10 B. subtilis

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207