Cited by 183Composting and Vermicomposting TechniquesSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsWaste Management and Recycling

Evaluation of Effective Microorganisms on home scale organic waste composting

Open access
Fan, Yee Van, Lee, Chew Tin, Klemeš, Jiří Jaromír, Chua, Lee Suan, Sarmidi, Mohamad Roji, Leow, Chee Woh·2018·Journal of Environmental Management

Abstract

Home composting can be an effective way to reduce the volume of municipal solid waste. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of Effective Microorganism™ (EM) for the home scale co-composting of food waste, rice bran and dried leaves. A general consensus is lacking regarding the efficiency of inoculation composting. Home scale composting was carried out with and without EM (control) to identify the roles of EM. The composting parameters for both trials showed a similar trend of changes during the decomposition. As assayed by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), the functional group of humic acid was initially dominated by aliphatic structure but was dominated by the aromatic in the final compost. The EM compost has a sharper peak of aromatic CC bond presenting a better degree of humification. Compost with EM achieved a slightly higher temperature at the early stage, with foul odour suppressed, enhanced humification process and a greater fat reduction (73%). No significant difference was found for the final composts inoculated with and without EM. The properties included pH (∼7), electric conductivity (∼2), carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (C: N < 14), colour (dark brown), odour (earthy smell), germination index (>100%), humic acid content (4.5-4.8%) and pathogen content (no Salmonella, <1000 Most Probable Number/g E. coli). All samples were well matured within 2 months. The potassium and phosphate contents in both cases were similar however the EM compost has a higher nitrogen content (+1.5%). The overall results suggested the positive effect provided by EM notably in odour control and humification.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.019

Cites

46 of 46 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
Fan, Y. V., Lee, C. T., Klemeš, J. J., Chua, L. S., Sarmidi, M. R., & Leow, C. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Malaysia (MY)
  • Brno University of Technology (CZ)
Corresponding author
Lee, Chew Tin
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
216
Pages
41-48
ISSN
0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2607010204
Cited by
183
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4
FWCI
13.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Management (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministry of Higher Education (2709.01K08, 7301.4B145)
  • UCTC
  • UTM
  • Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Composting and Vermicomposting Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Waste Management and Recycling
Keywords
effective microorganisms, home composting, co-composting, food waste, rice bran, dried leaves, inoculation, humification, humic acid, odor control, compost maturity, compost quality
MeSH terms
Composting, Escherichia coli, Humic Substances, Soil, Solid Waste

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