Cited by 23Algal biology and biofuel productionAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFluid Dynamics and Mixing

An integrated growth kinetics and computational fluid dynamics model for the analysis of algal productivity in open raceway ponds

Open access
Amini, Hossein, Wang, Lijun, Hashemisohi, Abolhasan, Shahbazi, Abolghasem, Bikdash, Marwan, KC, Dukka, Yuan, Wenqiao·2018·Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

Abstract

An integrated growth kinetic, light transfer and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model was developed to simulate the algal growth in open raceway ponds (ORP). C. vulgaris was used as a model algal strain. The coefficients of the growth kinetics were experimentally determined for the prediction of the growth of C. vulgaris as a function of environmental factors of light intensity, temperature and pH value. Experiments were conducted to grow C. vulgaris in lab-scale ORPs with medium depths of 0.20, 0.25 and 0.30 m to validate the mathematical model. The final measured biomass concentration after the 3-week growth were 0.48, 0.41, and 0.35 g/L for the ORPs with the medium depths of 0.20, 0.25, and 0.30 m, respectively. The predicted algal productivities for a 3-week cultivation were 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5 g/m²/day for depths of 0.20, 0.25, and 0.30 m, respectively, which well agreed with the measured values of 6.8, 7.2 and 7.4 g/m²/day, respectively. The biomass productivity decreased with the increase of growth time due to the increase of cell concentration. The model was further used to analyze the effects of different harvesting strategies on the algal productivity in ORPs. The algal productivity for the 3-week cultivation in the ORP with a 0.2 m depth by harvesting 50% algae at the target 0.2 g/L cell density was 10.5 g/m²/day, which was 43.8% higher than 7.3 g/m²/day for the 3-week cultivation under the same condition without harvesting at a final cell density of 0.48 g/L. The average algal productivity decreased with the increase of harvesting cell density.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compag.2018.01.010

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amini, H., Wang, L., Hashemisohi, A., Shahbazi, A., Bikdash, M., KC, D., & Yuan, W.
Affiliations
  • North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
Corresponding author
Wang, Lijun
Venue
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
145
Pages
363-372
ISSN
0168-1699 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2792225385
Cited by
23
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
0.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture (acceptedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Agriculture (2013-38821-21141, NC.X-294-5-15-130-1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
Keywords
raceway ponds, algal productivity, Chlorella vulgaris, algal growth kinetics, computational fluid dynamics, harvest strategies, cell density, pond depth, biomass productivity

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