ArticleScientific reports2025
Ammonia transformation by potential consortium in the aquatic system.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioremediation of ammonia using native bacterial strains and developed synthetic consortia from aquaculture wastewater in Tuticorin, Southeast coast of India.Biodegradation · 2026Article
- Development of a psychrotolerant composite microbial agent for nitrogen removal and its nitrogen metabolism pathways.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2026Article
- Bioremediation of hexamine and formaldehyde using a radio-tolerant bacterial consortium for efficient pollutant and COD removal.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present research, the removal of high concentration of ammonia, nitrite and nitrate was determined by using the efficient ammonia-oxidizing bacterial isolates (AOB AMS 1, AOB AMS 2, AOB AMS 5 and AOB AMSS 1) along with the consortium of all four bacterial isolates from the aquaculture both in lab-scale as well as in-situ at bioreactor level. It was found that the highest percentage of ammonia was degrade by AOB AMS 2 (99.64%± 5) followed by AOB AMS 5 (99.51%± 4.6), AOB AMSS 1 (99.38%± 5) and AOB AMS 1 (89.66%± 3.5) from an initial concentration of 30 mg/L whereas from an initial concentration of 60 mg/L, the removal rate of each strain was AOB AMS 5 (99.36%± 5), AOB AMSS 1 (99.15%± 5.60), AOB AMS 2 (98.78%± 5.3) and AOB AMS 1 (88.36%± 3.2) and their consortium removes (99.97%± 5.20)at 60 mg/L. Further, in-situ transformation was carried out in the river water with 5% of inoculum. Their growth was monitored (initial and final) by observing the colony forming unit (CFU) and transformation of ammonia and nitrite was also observed and it was found that (100 ± 2%)of ammonia was removed. The growth of consortium was 3 × 10
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.