Dilson Novais Rocha

Dr. Dilson Novais Rocha

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2021 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JFJavier Hernán Heredia Falconí
Javier Hernán Heredia Falconí
JSJimmy Soares
Jimmy Soares
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
MVMarcelo Gomes Marçal Vieira Vaz
Marcelo Gomes Marçal Vieira Vaz
MMMárcio Martins
Márcio Martins

1 December 2020 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
EBEloiny Guimarães Barbosa
Eloiny Guimarães Barbosa
NRNatalia dos Santos Renato
Natalia dos Santos Renato
EVEduardo Vinícius Vieira Varejão
Eduardo Vinícius Vieira Varejão
USUeveton Pimentel da Silva
Ueveton Pimentel da Silva
MMMárcio Martins
Márcio Martins

31 August 2023 in Biomass and Bioenergy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
ARAndré Pereira Rosa
André Pereira Rosa
ABAlisson Carraro Borges
Alisson Carraro Borges
JFJavier Hernán Heredia Falconí
Javier Hernán Heredia Falconí
LCLidiane Covell
Lidiane Covell
MMMárcio Martins
Márcio Martins

12 July 2024 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ISIzabelle de Paula Sousa
Izabelle de Paula Sousa
ARAndré Rosa
André Rosa
GAGuilherme Kurtemback Almeida
Guilherme Kurtemback Almeida
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
TNThiago De Alencar Neves
Thiago De Alencar Neves
ABAlisson Carraro Borges
Alisson Carraro Borges
The study aimed to evaluate and compare the co-digestion of swine wastewater (SW) and other co-substrates: grass residue (GR), food waste (FW), and poultry litter (PL). The comparisons were performed using the biochemical methane potential (BMP) test. The maximum accumulated methane (CH4) production was submitted to a joint analysis of variance. Tukey’s test (α = 0.05) was used to compare the results of the treatments, and Dunnett’s test (α = 0.05) was used to compare the ratios (100:0, 75:25, 50:50, 25:75, and 0:100) (based on volatile solids—VS). In addition, both the synergistic effect and kinetic adjustment of some models were evaluated. The results indicated that the co-digestion of all substrates (GR, FW, and PL) with SW improved the methane production yield in comparison with mono-digestion (GR, FW, and PL). A positive synergistic effect was observed for the FW:SW (25:75 and 75:25). According to both Tukey’s and Dunnett’s tests (α = 0.05), the FW:SW ratio of 25:75 did not show statistical difference compared with the mono-digestion (SW), which exhibited the largest CH4 production. Among the models evaluated, the modified Gompertz function presented the best fit. For the co-digestion treatments, the ratio of FW:SW of 25:75 exhibited the most promising potential for integrated management, demonstrating the best synergistic effect among the substrates. In this context, methane production from co-digestion equalled that of mono-digestion, while enabling integrated residue management.

21 September 2024 in Food Research International
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JJJose Roberto Miranda Junior
Jose Roberto Miranda Junior
CSCésar Augusto Sodré Da Silva
César Augusto Sodré Da Silva
LGLuciano de Moura Guimarães
Luciano de Moura Guimarães
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
Muhammad ALHAJI ADAMUMuhammad ALHAJI ADAMU
Muhammad ALHAJI ADAMU
JCJane SELIA DOS REIS Coimbra
Jane SELIA DOS REIS Coimbra

16 January 2026 in Biomass and Bioenergy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
LILuna Lilás Henriques Ildefonso
Luna Lilás Henriques Ildefonso
NRNatalia dos Santos Renato
Natalia dos Santos Renato
NSNathália Domingues Silva
Nathália Domingues Silva
DRDilson Novais Rocha
Dilson Novais Rocha
MMMarcio Arêdes Martins
Marcio Arêdes Martins