You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Phosphorus recovery from wastewater through microbial processes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Opinion in Biotechnology, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.copbio.2012.08.001 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhiguo Yuan, Steven Pratt, Damien J Batstone |
| Abstract |
Waste streams offer a compelling opportunity to recover phosphorus (P). 15-20% of world demand for phosphate rock could theoretically be satisfied by recovering phosphorus from domestic waste streams alone. For very dilute streams (<10 mg PL(-1)), including domestic wastewater, it is necessary to concentrate phosphorus in order to make recovery and reuse feasible. This review discusses enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) as a key technology to achieve this. EBPR relies on polyphosphate accumulating organisms (PAOs) to take up phosphorus from waste streams, so concentrating phosphorus in biomass. The P-rich biosolids can be either directly applied to land, or solubilized and phosphorus recovered as a mineral product. Direct application is effective, but the product is bulky and carries contaminant risks that need to be managed. Phosphorus release can be achieved using either thermochemical or biochemical methods, while recovery is generally by precipitation as struvite. We conclude that while EBPR technology is mature, the subsequent phosphorus release and recovery technologies need additional development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 619 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 603 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 124 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 120 | 19% |
| Researcher | 60 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 59 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 36 | 6% |
| Other | 64 | 10% |
| Unknown | 156 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 130 | 21% |
| Engineering | 113 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 62 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 35 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 4% |
| Other | 66 | 11% |
| Unknown | 188 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Biotechnology
#2,532
of 2,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,678
of 186,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Biotechnology
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,750 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 186,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.