Disinfection of poultry processing wastewater using advanced oxidation processes.

Seth Adesope, Mark Carlson, Nikolay Barashkov, Casey Owens, Tomi Obe

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Seth AdesopeDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.

Mark CarlsonMicro-Tracers, Inc., San Francisco, CA 94124, USA.

Nikolay BarashkovMicro-Tracers, Inc., San Francisco, CA 94124, USA.

Casey OwensDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.

Tomi ObeDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA; Department of Food Science, Center for Food Safety, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Fayetteville, AR 72704, USA. Electronic address: toobe@uark.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the increasing demand of poultry products, poultry processing continues to generate a large volume of wastewater rich in diverse foodborne pathogens that require effective treatment to support safe reuse. This study evaluated the disinfection rate of photo-electrochemical (PEC) treatment, which combines electrochemical (EC) and photochemical (PC) treatments for poultry processing wastewater. Wastewater from the scald and inside-outside bird washer (IOBW) units were treated using independent 7 L and 30 L PEC reactors operated at 70 V and 100 V EC with a fixed 1.6% curcumin for PC. Treatment was conducted for 300 minutes with aliquots collected every 30 minutes for quantification of aerobic bacteria (AC), Enterobacteriaceae (EB), coliforms (CC), and E. coli, on Petrifilm™. Furthermore, samples at 0, 150 and 300 minutes were selectively enriched and plated on Campylobacter agar and xylose lysine tergitol-4 for Campylobacter and Salmonella detection, respectively. Microbial reductions were reported as log

Indexed as

DisinfectionElectrochemical TechniquesWaste Disposal, FluidWastewaterAnimalsFood, ProcessedOxidation-ReductionWastewaterAdvanced oxidation processes (AOPs)Electrochemical processFoodborne pathogensPhotochemical treatmentPoultry processing wastewater

Identifiers

PMID42066406

DOI10.1016/j.psj.2026.106954

PMCPMC13142115

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.