4.7 Article

Degradation of Uranium-Contaminated Decontamination Film by UV Irradiation and Microbial Biodegradation

期刊

MICROBIAL ECOLOGY
卷 84, 期 2, 页码 439-450

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00248-021-01862-0

关键词

Decontamination film; Radionuclide; Biodegradation; Photodegradation; Microbial diversity

资金

  1. National Key Laboratory of National Nuclear and Biochemical Disaster Protection Open Fund Project [SKLNBC2019-21]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study provides a complete degradation scheme for acrylic copolymer/cellulose acetate butyrate peelable decontamination films. The results show that UV radiation combined with microbial flora can achieve rapid degradation of the decontamination films, with microbial flora inducing significant decreases in weight-average molecular weight and number-average molecular weight.
This research provides a complete degradation scheme for acrylic copolymer/cellulose acetate butyrate peelable decontamination films. This study analyzed the removal efficiency of uranium by peelable decontamination film. More importantly, the degradability of the films was evaluated by a combined treatment with UV radiation and microbial biodegradation. The results showed that UV radiation would rupture the surface of the decontamination films, which leaded the weight-average molecular weight decreased by 55.3% and number-average molecular weight decreased by 75.83%. Additionally, the microbial flora induced light-degradable decontamination film weight-average molecular weight and number-average molecular weight decreased by 9.3% and 30.73%, respectively. 16S rRNA microbial diversity analysis indicated that Pantoea, Xylella, Cronobacter, and Olivibacter were the major degrading bacteria genera. Among them, 4 key strains that can be stripped of decontamination films have been isolated and identified from the dominant degrading bacteria group. The results show that UV radiation combined with microbial flora can achieve rapid degradation of the decontamination films.

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