4.7 Article

Gaseous toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene mixture removal in a microbial fuel cell: Performance, biofilm characteristics, and mechanisms

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 386, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.123916

关键词

MFC; BTEX; Pollutant interactions; Microbial community

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21938012, 21876157, 51678528]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Science and Technology Plan for Analytical Test [2018C37010]
  3. Water Conservancy Science and Technology Project of Zhejiang Province, China [RC1721]
  4. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT_17R97]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) are regarded as promising alternatives to anaerobic benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) mineralization due to the enhancement of microbial degradation rate caused by bioanodes. In this research, a dual-chambered MFC was employed to evaluate the removal efficiency and power generation of single TE(o-X) or of dual or ternary TE(o-X) mixtures. Individually, TE(o-X) was readily biodegradable with a removal efficiency of 94.8%, 86.3%, and 71.6%, respectively, but the presence of toluene and o-xylene exhibited an adverse influence on the degradation of other mixed components. The o-xylene has the greatest inhibitory effect on microbial activity, as evidenced by laser scanning confocal microscope images. Microbial community analysis revealed that exoelectrogens prevailed in the absence of the o-xylene. Shifting the feeding gas from toluene to another individual gas or mixture caused the quantities of the exoelectrogens to gradually decrease. Moreover, the o-xylene degrader of Alicycliphilus sp. were prevailed from similar to 17.7% to similar to 60.3% in presence of the o-xylene. In addition, the observation of the nanowire/pili using scanning electron microscope images and cyclic voltammetry analysis revealed that the electrons produced were transferred to the anode directly.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据