Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the effects of methanol (MeOH) on the biofiltration of dimethyl sulfide (DMS). Experiments were performed in both small bottles (batch) and continuous laboratory-scale biofilters at 30°C. The target loading ranges for DMS and MeOH were 0-10 g m-3 h-1 (concentration range: 0-45 ppmv) and 0-150 g m-3 h-1 (0-1200 ppmv), respectively. Results obtained from continuous experiments using the three bench-scale biofilters packed with inorganic material clearly show that MeOH has a positive effect (11 fold increase) on the biofiltration of DMS. Further experiments indicate that MeOH addition enhances biomass concentration and viability (3 fold) in the biofilters. However, a suspension of MeOH addition causes a rapid, significant increase in the removal rate of DMS, suggesting that the presence of MeOH also has a competitive effect on the biofiltration of DMS. This study suggests that there exists an optimum mix of DMS and MeOH for the treatment of DMS in inorganic biofilters. Strategic MeOH addition (step feeding and pulse feeding of MeOH) was proposed and experimentally tested to enhance DMS removal in the biofilters by 35-46%. Both steady-state and dynamic models incorporating the competitive and activation effects of MeOH were developed and experimentally validated to describe steady-state and transient-state behavior of the inorganic biofilters treating DMS in the presence of MeOH. The steady-state model can be used to optimize the biofiltration of DMS by providing an optimal MeOH addition rate for a given DMS loading. The dynamic model provides good prediction for the biodegradation of DMS in the biofilter with variable biofilm density along the biofilter column as a function of MeOH concentration in the air stream. Experimental results also show that MeOH alleviates the pH drop and enhances the stability of biofilter performance on DMS removal. It is proposed that MeOH addition consumes oxygen and results in a lower conversion ratio of sulfide to sulfuric acid due to the formation of elemental sulfur, reducing acidification in the biofilters. At the same time, MeOH prevents acid production from nitrification, likely by limiting oxygen and nutrients to nitrifying bacteria in the MeOH-fed biofilters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".