Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38713232›Full record

ReviewBioresources and bioprocessing2024

Anaerobic digestion of process water from hydrothermal treatment processes: a review of inhibitors and detoxification approaches.

Mei Zhou, Kayode Taiwo, Han Wang, Jean-Nepomuscene Ntihuga, Largus T Angenent, Joseph G Usack

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioresources and bioprocessing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Mei ZhouEnvironmental Biotechnology Group, Department of Geosciences, University of Tübingen, Schnarrenbergstr. 94-96, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Kayode TaiwoDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, 100 Cedar Street, Athens, GA, 30602, USA.
Han WangEnvironmental Biotechnology Group, Department of Geosciences, University of Tübingen, Schnarrenbergstr. 94-96, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Jean-Nepomuscene NtihugaEnvironmental Biotechnology Group, Department of Geosciences, University of Tübingen, Schnarrenbergstr. 94-96, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Largus T AngenentEnvironmental Biotechnology Group, Department of Geosciences, University of Tübingen, Schnarrenbergstr. 94-96, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Joseph G UsackDepartment of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, 100 Cedar Street, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. joseph.usack@uga.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7859-4414

Funding

China Scholarship Council 202006310033German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development I-1547-500.15/2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrating hydrothermal treatment processes and anaerobic digestion (AD) is promising for maximizing resource recovery from biomass and organic waste. The process water generated during hydrothermal treatment contains high concentrations of organic matter, which can be converted into biogas using AD. However, process water also contains various compounds that inhibit the AD process. Fingerprinting these inhibitors and identifying suitable mitigation strategies and detoxification methods is necessary to optimize the integration of these two technologies. By examining the existing literature, we were able to: (1) compare the methane yields and organics removal efficiency during AD of various hydrothermal treatment process water; (2) catalog the main AD inhibitors found in hydrothermal treatment process water; (3) identify recalcitrant components limiting AD performance; and (4) evaluate approaches to detoxify specific inhibitors and degrade recalcitrant components. Common inhibitors in process water are organic acids (at high concentrations), total ammonia nitrogen (TAN), oxygenated organics, and N-heterocyclic compounds. Feedstock composition is the primary determinant of organic acid and TAN formation (carbohydrates-rich and protein-rich feedstocks, respectively). In contrast, processing conditions (e.g., temperature, pressure, reaction duration) influence the formation extent of oxygenated organics and N-heterocyclic compounds. Struvite precipitation and zeolite adsorption are the most widely used approaches to eliminate TAN inhibition. In contrast, powdered and granular activated carbon and ozonation are the preferred methods to remove toxic substances before AD treatment. Currently, ozonation is the most effective approach to reduce the toxicity and recalcitrance of N and O-heterocyclic compounds during AD. Microaeration methods, which disrupt the AD microbiome less than ozone, might be more practical for nitrifying TAN and degrading recalcitrant compounds, but further research in this area is necessary.

Indexed as

Anaerobic digestionBiogasDetoxificationHydrothermal treatmentInhibitionProcess water

Identifiers

PMID38713232
PMCPMC11076452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.