“…These methods have some disadvantages since they are costly, low in effectiveness, not environmentally friendly, and also require the application of technology. These factors limit their application, particularly at small farm levels (Jiang et al, 2016).…”
Wheat straw predigestion is needed for the industrial bioprocess and ruminant feeding. We aimed to search for some predigestion conditions for wheat straw. 500ml of water was used as a moistener for each 100g of the chopped straw sample. For each sample, 2g NaOH as alkalizer; 3g citric acid as neutralizer; a mix of 1g KH2PO4, 1g (NH4)SO4, 0.3g CaCl2, 0.2g MgSO4, 2g powdered molasses and 1g inactive dry yeast as supplements were used. Inoculation culture was non-selected total flora of rumen remained live after consecutive treatments of 30 min of alkali (NaOH, pH 10) and 30 min of acid (3% citric acid, pH 4) environments. The samples were incubated aerobically at 37 0 C for 14 days, and the analyses were made at days 0, 7, and 14. Hot alkali and neutralizer determined to be the most effective on predigestion when used consecutively. The 15 to 20% increases were determined from the water-soluble mass of the samples incubated for 7 days. No net effect of the supplements and inoculant on the predigestion was determined. From the dominant aerobic microflora of the predigested samples, some opportunistic and/or sporadic pathogenic aerobic Gram+ ve bacteria were identified by using VITEK 2 GP identification system. As a result, it was determined that 2g NaOH in hot water for 7 days of microbial predigestion of 100g chopped straw appeared to be sufficient. Nevertheless, the hygiene aspect of such bacteria in the predigestion applications have to be intensively investigated in further studies. Acceptability, digestibility, and rumen health effects of such predigested straw have also to be tested when it was aimed to prepare feed materials.
“…These methods have some disadvantages since they are costly, low in effectiveness, not environmentally friendly, and also require the application of technology. These factors limit their application, particularly at small farm levels (Jiang et al, 2016).…”
Wheat straw predigestion is needed for the industrial bioprocess and ruminant feeding. We aimed to search for some predigestion conditions for wheat straw. 500ml of water was used as a moistener for each 100g of the chopped straw sample. For each sample, 2g NaOH as alkalizer; 3g citric acid as neutralizer; a mix of 1g KH2PO4, 1g (NH4)SO4, 0.3g CaCl2, 0.2g MgSO4, 2g powdered molasses and 1g inactive dry yeast as supplements were used. Inoculation culture was non-selected total flora of rumen remained live after consecutive treatments of 30 min of alkali (NaOH, pH 10) and 30 min of acid (3% citric acid, pH 4) environments. The samples were incubated aerobically at 37 0 C for 14 days, and the analyses were made at days 0, 7, and 14. Hot alkali and neutralizer determined to be the most effective on predigestion when used consecutively. The 15 to 20% increases were determined from the water-soluble mass of the samples incubated for 7 days. No net effect of the supplements and inoculant on the predigestion was determined. From the dominant aerobic microflora of the predigested samples, some opportunistic and/or sporadic pathogenic aerobic Gram+ ve bacteria were identified by using VITEK 2 GP identification system. As a result, it was determined that 2g NaOH in hot water for 7 days of microbial predigestion of 100g chopped straw appeared to be sufficient. Nevertheless, the hygiene aspect of such bacteria in the predigestion applications have to be intensively investigated in further studies. Acceptability, digestibility, and rumen health effects of such predigested straw have also to be tested when it was aimed to prepare feed materials.
“…Hard water affects the dyeing process and, using optimized dyeing conditions, the adverse effect of water hardness can be avoided by chelating the metal ions contributing to hardness through sequestering agents, i.e., polyphosphates or amino carboxylic acids [5][6][7][8].…”
Textile wet processing utilizes a huge amount of water, and the discharged water contains a significant amount of salts used in the pre-treatment, bleaching, dyeing, and printing processes [1][2][3][4]. Hard water affects the dyeing process and, using optimized dyeing conditions, the adverse effect of water hardness can be avoided by chelating the metal ions contributing to hardness through sequestering agents, i.e., polyphosphates or amino carboxylic acids [5][6][7][8].Pol. J. Environ. Stud. Vol. 26, No. 2 (2017), 747-753 Original
AbstractA laboratory-scale study was performed for fostering an eco-friendly approach by substituting synthetic colorant with natural plant extracts as dye source in the presence of hard water (prepared from NaHCO 3 , MgSO 4 , CaSO 4 , and KCl). The dyeing behavior of cotton fabric was analyzed using extract from Eucalyptus globulus and Curcuma longa. Alum and ferrous sulphate were used as mordanting agents to mitigate the hard water effect on dyeing properties. The color strength and fastness properties of dyed cotton were studied. The hard water badly affected the color properties of fabric dyed with natural dyes. Mordant lessened the adverse effects of hard water, but not satisfactorily. The sequestering agent proved to be significant in mitigating the negative effect of hard water on fabric dyeing. Moreover, water hardness also adversely affected the extraction of natural dyes from Eucalyptus globulus and Curcuma longa; however, dye exhaustion was improved by mordant and the sequestering agent. Results revealed that the negative impact of hard water on dyeing properties can be mitigated using a sequestering agent.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.