ReviewiScience2021
Anaerobic co-digestion of agricultural wastes toward circular bioeconomy.
Review in iScience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Waste to Health: Landfill Biogas Recovery as a Strategy for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Public Health Co-Benefits in Brazil.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Microalgae-Driven Circular Agriculture: System Integration, Nutrient Recovery, and AI-Assisted Optimization.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Amaranth as a sustainable feed resource for livestock.Veterinary and animal science · 2026Review
- The harvested energy using MFCs by enriching saline-alkali tolerant microorganisms from biogas slurry.iScience · 2025Article
- Review
- Meso- and thermophilic posttreatment of press water coming from a thermophilic municipal solid waste digester.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2024Article
- Energy and Nutrients from Apple Waste Using Anaerobic Digestion and Membrane Technology.Membranes · 2022Article
- Investigating microbial dynamics and potential advantages of anaerobic co-digestion of cheese whey and poultry slaughterhouse wastewaters.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Indicative Marker Microbiome Structures Deduced from the Taxonomic Inventory of 67 Full-Scale Anaerobic Digesters of 49 Agricultural Biogas Plants.Microorganisms · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A huge amount of agricultural wastes and waste activated-sludge are being generated every year around the world. Anaerobic co-digestion (AcD) has been considered as an alternative for the utilization of organic matters from such organic wastes by producing bioenergy and biochemicals to realize a circular bioeconomy. Despite recent advancement in AcD processes, the effect of feedstock compositions and operating conditions on the biomethane production processe has not been critically explored. In this paper, we have reviewed the effects of feedstock (organic wastes) characteristics, including particle size, carbon-to-nitrogen ratio, and pretreatment options, on the performance of an anaerobic digestion process. In addition, we provided an overview of the effect of key control parameters, including retention time, temperature, pH of digestate, volatile fatty acids content, total solids content, and organic loading rate. Lastly, based on the findings from the literature, we have presented several perspectives and prospects on priority research to promote AcD to a steppingstone for a circular bioeconomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.