MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162135625 · doi:10.82308/55514

Evaluating the potential of alder-Frankia symbionts for the remediation and revegetation of oil sands tailings

2006· dissertation· en· W7162135625 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. Mehta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsRevegetationMineralization (soil science)Oil sandsEnvironmental remediationMicrocosmPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tailings are the waste produced as a result of the extraction of oil from the tar sands in northern Alberta. Many avenues for the reclamation of tailings are being researched, but one area that has received little attention is phytoremediation. The Alder-Frankia symbiotic relationship in the tailings was investigated for its potential in revegetation and remediation of the tailings. Two species of alders were examined Alnus glutinosa and A. rugosa. The impact of the alders was monitored through the investigation of the differences in the microbial community present in the oil sands tailings and composite tailings (CT) with and without alders. For our investigation we used culture dependent techniques (plate counts and mineralization assays) and culture independent techniques (16S rRNA gene PCR, catabolic PCR and DGGE). The alders lowered the pH of the tailings, increased rates of mineralization, increased the general microbial population in the tailings by one to two orders of magnitude and increased the microbial diversity. A. rugosa however, had a greater impact on the mineralization of poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and, being native to Alberta, was chosen for further experimentation, using only composite tailings. The aim of the experiments was to determine the effect of a Frankia inoculum on the growth of A. rugosa in (CT) and the associated microbial community. The microflora in the bulk soil, rhizosphere and inside the root of inoculated and non-inoculated A. rugosa were compared through microbial enumerations of the community, with general and selective media and mineralization assays. A. rugosa inoculated with Frankia was taller and the roots were more developed and the endophytic community of inoculated A. rugosa had greater rates of naphthalene mineralization. The results indicate that A. rugosa inoculated with Frankia could be used for the phytoremediation of tailings and for the re-establishment of a forest ecosystem.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactants→French-language works237,207→