3.8 Article

Neutralization of acidic soil using Myxococcus xanthus: Important parameters and their implications

期刊

GEOSYSTEM ENGINEERING
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 180-187

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/12269328.2021.1947901

关键词

Neutralization; soil acidification; myxcoccus xanthus; peat moss

资金

  1. Korean Environment Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) through Ecological Imitationbased Environmental Pollution Management Technology Development Project
  2. Korea Ministry of Environment (MOE) [2019002800004]
  3. INHA University Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that M. xanthus can neutralize acidic soil through its specific metabolism, producing ammonium ions and hydroxide simultaneously. Increasing peat moss content inhibits the neutralization effect of M. xanthus, while reducing peat moss content can enhance the neutralization performance. The interaction of soil amount with peat moss content or microbial population density is significantly correlated to the neutralization of acidic soil.
Soil acidification through acid rain/deposition has been a serious problem that adversely affects the soil environment. In this study, Myxococcus xanthus, myxobacteria, was assessed towards neutralization of artificial acidic soil. Differences in initial pH and peat moss content in soil with incubated M. xanthus were being compared using a one-variable-at-a-time approach. It showed that the M. xanthus could neutralize the acidified soil using their specific metabolism, producing ammonium ions and hydroxide simultaneously. Increasing peat moss content could direct the neutralization performance of M. xanthus towards inhibition whereas reducing the peat moss content could improve the neutralization performance. Among experimental parameters such as initial pH, peat moss content in soil, and microorganism concentration, the interaction of soil amount either with peat moss content or microbial population density was meaningfully correlated to the neutralization of acidic soil.

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

3.8
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