ArticleBiology2025
Enhanced Biomethane Conversion and Microbial Community Shift Using Anaerobic/Mesophilic Co-Digestion of Dragon Fruit Peel and Chicken Manure.
Article in Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of condition-specific optimal reference genes for qPCR data normalisation in pink bollworm Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders).Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Prenatal and Lactational Exposure to Polystyrene Nanoplastics Induces Lipid Accumulation in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells of Male Offspring via the MAPK/ERK/UHRF1 Signaling Pathway.Cardiovascular toxicology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biogas and methane generated from the anaerobic digestion (AD) of organic waste present a highly effective alternative to fossil fuels. The study assessed using dragon fruit peel (DFP) as a co-substrate to enhance chicken manure (CM) biodegradability and stabilize the AD process for methane during co-digestion. The biochemical methane potential assays were conducted at mono-controls (CM and DFP) and co-digestion at CM-75:DFP-25, CM-50:DFP-50, and CM-25:DFP-75. Compared to the controls, mono-digestion produced 103.3 mL/g of volatile solids (VSs) of CM and 34.6 mL/g VS of DFP, while all treatment groups of co-digestion exhibited an increase in methane production. The highest yield was 180.3 mL/g VS at CM-25:DFP-75 (74.6% and 421.1% increase relative to mono-digestions of CM and DFP, respectively), followed by 148.3 mL/g VS at CM-50:DFP-50 (43.6% higher than CM) and 116.7 mL/g VS at CM-75:DFP-25 (13% higher than CM). Process stability at the optimal DFP co-substrate ratio (CM-25:DFP-75) was confirmed by total volatile fatty acid (VFA) conversion, as below 0.5 g/L VFAs were observed at the end of incubation, indicating highly acceptable performance. The relative abundance of
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.