CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 146Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionBiofuel production and bioconversionComposting and Vermicomposting Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Anaerobic co-digestion of swine manure with energy crop residues

Cuetos, María José, Fernández, Camino, Gómez, Xiomar, Morán, Antonio·2011·Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering
DOI 10.1007/s12257-011-0117-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12257-011-0117-4

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cuetos et al. observed increments in biogas production in BMP tests of swine manure with crop residues, but synergistic effects were not observable.

    “These authors also described increments in biogas production when performing biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests, but synergistic effects were not observable.”

    From Biogas Production from Organic Wastes: Integrating Concepts of Circular Economy (2021) · cites this paper as Cuetos et al. [32]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Raven, R. P. J. M. and K. H. Gregersen (2007) Biogas plants in Denmark: Successes and setbacks. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 11: 116–132. · DOI
  2. Weiland, P. (2006) Biomass digestion in agriculture: A successful pathway for the energy production and waste treatment in Germany. Eng. Life Sci. 6: 302–309. · DOI
  3. Tranter, R. B., A. Swinbank, P. J. Jones, C. J. Banks, and A. M. Salter (2011) Assessing the potential for the uptake of on-farm anaerobic digestion for energy production in England. Energy Policy 39: 2424–2430. · DOI
  4. Ward, A. J., P. J. Hobbs, P. J. Holliman, and D. L. Jones (2008) Optimisation of the Anaerobic digestion of agricultural resources. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 7928–7940. · DOI
  5. Álvarez, J. A., L. Otero, and J. M. Lema (2010) A methodology for optimising feed composition for anaerobic co-digestion of agro-industrial wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 1153–1158. · DOI
  6. Ashekuzzaman, S. M. and T. G. Poulsen (2011) Optimizing feed composition for improved methane yield during anaerobic digestion of cow manure based waste mixtures. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 2213–2218. · DOI
  7. Demirel, B. and P. Scherer (2011) Trace element requirements of agricultural biogas digesters during biological conversion of renewable biomass to methane. Biomass Bioenergy 35: 992–998. · DOI
  8. Mondragón, F. A., P. Samar, H. H. J. Cox, B. K. Ahring, and R. Iranpour (2006) Anaerobic codigestion of municipal, farm, and industrial organic wastes: A survey of recent literature. Water Environ. Res. 78: 607–636. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Chen, Y., J. J. Cheng, and K. S. Creamer (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion processes: A review. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 4044–4064. · DOI
  10. Hansen, K. H., I. Angelidaki, and B. K. Ahring (1998) Anaerobic digestion of swine manure: Inhibition by ammonia. Water Res. 32: 5–12. · DOI
  11. Kayhanian, M. (1994) Performance of a high-solids anaerobic digestion process under various ammonia concentrations. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 59: 349–352. · DOI
  12. Henze, M. (1995) Wastewater treatment: Biological and chemical processes. Environmental engineering, Springer, Berlín, Germany.
  13. Angelidaki, I. and B. K. Ahring (1994) Anaerobic thermophilic digestion of manure at different ammonia loads: Effect of temperature. Water Res. 28: 727–731. · DOI
  14. Mata-Alvarez, J., S. Macé, and P. Llabrés (2000) Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. An overview of research achievements and perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 74: 3–16 · DOI
  15. Molinuevo-Salces, B., M. C. García-González, C. González-Fernández, M. J. Cuetos, A. Morán, and X. Gómez (2010) Anaerobic co-digestion of livestock wastes with vegetable processing wastes: A statistical analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 9479–9485. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Hendriks, A. T. W. M. and G. Zeeman (2009) Pretreatments to enhance the digestibility of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 10–18. · DOI
  17. Palmowski, L. M. and J. A. Müller (2000) Influence of the size reduction of organic wastes on their anaerobic digestion. Wat. Sci. Technol. 41: 155–162. · DOI
  18. Gómez, X., M. J. Cuetos, J. I. Prieto, and A. Morán (2009) Bio-Hydrogen production from waste fermentation: Mixing and static conditions. Renew. Energy 34: 970–975. · DOI
  19. Cuetos, M. J., X. Gómez, M. Otero, and A. Morán (2008) Anaerobic digestion of solid slaughterhouse waste (SHW) at laboratory scale: Influence of co-digestion with the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW). Biochem. Eng. J. 40: 99–106. · DOI · Paper page
  20. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Environment Federation (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 20th ed., American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C, USA.
  21. Walkey, A. and I. A. Black (1934) An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37: 29–38. · DOI
  22. Lobato, A., M. J. Cuetos, X. Gómez, and A. Morán (2010) Improvement of biogas production by co-digestion of swine manure and residual glycerine. Biofuels 1: 59–68. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Chae, K. J., A. Jang, S. K. Yim, and I. S. Kim (2008) The effects of digestion temperature and temperature shock on the biogas yields from the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 1–6. · DOI
  24. Møller, H. B., S. G. Sommer, and B. K. Ahring (2004) Methane productivity of manure, straw and solid fractions of manure. Biomass Bioenergy 26: 485–495. · DOI
  25. Vavilin, V. A., S. V. Rytov, L. Y. Lokshina, J. A. Rintala, and G. Lyberatos (2001) Simplified hydrolysis models for the optimal design of two-stage anaerobic digestion. Water Res. 35: 4247–4251. · DOI
  26. Xie, S., P. G. Lawlor, J. P. Frost, Z. Hu, and X. Zhan (2011) Effect of pig manure to grass silage ratio on methane production in batch anaerobic co-digestion of concentrated pig manure and grass silage. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 5728–5733. · DOI
  27. Vavilin, V. A., S. V. Rytov, and L. Y. Lokshina (1996) A description of hydrolysis kinetics in anaerobic degradation of particulate organic matter. Bioresour. Technol. 56: 229–237. · DOI
  28. Labatut, R. A., L. T. Angenent, and N. R. Scott (2011) Biochemical methane potential and biodegradability of complex organic substrates. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 2255–2264. · DOI
  29. Lay, J., Y. Li, and T. Noike (1997) Influences of pH and moisture content on the methane production in high-solids sludge digestion. Water Res. 31: 1518–1524. · DOI
  30. Sung, S. and T. Liu (2003) Ammonia inhibition on thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Chemosphere. 53: 43–52. · DOI
  31. Wu, X., W. Yao, J. Zhu, and C. Miller (2010) Biogas and CH4 productivity by co-digesting swine manure with three crop residues as an external carbon source. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 4042–4047. · DOI
  32. Fujita, M., J. M. Scharer, and M. Moo-Young (1980) Effect of corn stover addition on the anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Agr. Wastes 2:177–184. · DOI
  33. Llabrés-Luengo, P. and J. Mata-Alvarez (1988) Influence of temperature, buffer, composition and straw particle length on the anaerobic digestion of wheat straw-pig manure mixtures. Resour. Conserv. Recycling 1: 27–37. · DOI
  34. Lehtomäki, A., S. Huttunen, and J. A. Rintala (2007) Laboratory investigations on co-digestion of energy crops and crop residues with cow manure for methane production: effect of crop to manure ratio. Resour. Conserv. Recycling 51: 591–609. · DOI
  35. Fischer, J. R., E. L. Iannotti, and C. D. Fulhage (1983) Production of methane gas from combinations of wheat straw and swine manure. Trans. ASAE 26: 546–548. · DOI
  36. Comino, E., M. Rosso, and V. Riggio (2010) Investigation of increasing organic loading rate in the co-digestion of energy crops and cow manure mix. Bioresour. Technol. 101: 3013–3019. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cuetos, M. J., Fernández, C., Gómez, X., & Morán, A.
Affiliations
Universidad de León (ES)
Corresponding author
Fernández, Camino
ORCID
Venue
Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-09-27
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
1044-1052
ISSN
  • 1226-8372 (ISSN-L)
  • 1976-3816
DOI
10.1007/s12257-011-0117-4
OpenAlex
W2031777988
Cited by
146
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 10
FWCI
23.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Composting and Vermicomposting Techniques
Keywords
co-digestion, pig manure, biogas production, methane yield, maize residue, rapeseed residue, sunflower residue, hydraulic retention time, mesophilic digestion, agricultural waste valorization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review