Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 454

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 180 of the 180 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comprehensive review on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste

Open access
Zamri, M.F.M.A., Hasmady, Saiful, Akhiar, Afifi, Ideris, Fazril, Shamsuddin, A.H., Mofijur, M., Fattah, I. M. Rizwanul, Mahlia, T.M.I.·2021·Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

Abstract

Abstract This article aims to comprehensively review the anaerobic digestion (AD) process utilising the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) substrate. The AD of OFMSW has received considerable attention due to its significant energy and nutrient recovery as well as its greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation potential. AD is a biological process involving treating and stabilising organic matter in the absence of oxygen accomplished by a consortium of microorganisms and occurs under hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis phases. The hydrolysis phase is recognised as the primary rate-limiting step. Thus, exploring the ways to speed up the hydrolysis process will maximise biogas production. The key factors affecting the digestion efficiency include feedstock quality, pre-treatment process, design and selection of digestion process and process conditions including pH, temperature, carbon to nitrogen (C: N) ratio, organic loading rate and hydraulic retention time. The review reveals that solid-state anaerobic digestion (SSAD) is best suited for OFMSW due to its high solid concentration (>15%) and better process performance. The continuous digestion with thermophilic temperatures was found to be the best condition for high solid AD process. The plug flow and continuous stir tank reactors were the best performing options to control the biological conditions for the digestate post-treatment. Proper selection of the parameters for the whole process is crucial in ensuring process feasibility and economic sustainability of AD of OFMSW. The study revealed that the AD of OFMSW could play a significant role to mitigate waste and waste-related problems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110637

Cites

180 of 180 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 180 references

Cited by

See all 454

Metadata

Authors
Zamri, M. F. M. A., Hasmady, S., Akhiar, A., Ideris, F., Shamsuddin, A. H., Mofijur, M., Fattah, I. M. R., & Mahlia, T. M. I.
Venue
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
137
Pages
110637
ISSN
1364-0321 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3112959746
Cited by
454
References
180
FWCI
26.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comprehensive review on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110637
The paper
Zamri, M. F. M. A., Hasmady, S., Akhiar, A., Ideris, F., Shamsuddin, A. H., Mofijur, M., Fattah, I. M. R., & Mahlia, T. M. I. (2021). A comprehensive review on anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110637

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.