Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31194008›Full record

ArticleWater research X2018

Enhanced biofilm solubilization by urea in reverse osmosis membrane systems.

H Sanawar, I Pinel, N M Farhat, Sz S Bucs, J Zlopasa, J C Kruithof, G J Witkamp, M C M van Loosdrecht, J S Vrouwenvelder

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Water research X, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Diversity in the swimming motility and flagellar regulon structure of uropathogenic Morganella morganii strains.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

H SanawarKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
I PinelDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629, HZ Delft, the Netherlands.
N M FarhatKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
Sz S BucsKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
J ZlopasaDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629, HZ Delft, the Netherlands.
J C KruithofWetsus, European Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Technology, Oostergoweg 9, 8911, MA, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands.
G J WitkampKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
M C M van LoosdrechtDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9, 2629, HZ Delft, the Netherlands.
J S VrouwenvelderKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal, 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology · SADelft University of Technology · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemical cleaning is routinely performed in reverse osmosis (RO) plants for the regeneration of RO membranes that suffer from biofouling problems. The potential of urea as a chaotropic agent to enhance the solubilization of biofilm proteins has been reported briefly in the literature. In this paper the efficiency of urea cleaning for RO membrane systems has been compared to conventionally applied acid/alkali treatment. Preliminary assessment confirmed that urea did not damage the RO polyamide membranes and that the membrane cleaning efficiency increased with increasing concentrations of urea and temperature. Accelerated biofilm formation was carried out in membrane fouling simulators which were subsequently cleaned with (i) 0.01M sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and 0.1M hydrochloric acid (HCl) (typically applied in industry), (ii) urea (CO(NH

Indexed as

BiofoulingChemical cleaningMembrane fouling simulatorReverse osmosisUrea

Identifiers

PMID31194008
PMCPMC6549900
OpenAlexW2898060518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.