4.8 Article

Space station biomining experiment demonstrates rare earth element extraction in microgravity and Mars gravity

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-19276-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. UK Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/R000875/1]
  2. Principal's Career Development PhD Scholarship
  3. DLR grant DLR-FuE-Projekt ISS LIFE, Programm RF-FuW, Teilprogramm [475]
  4. Helmholtz Space Life Sciences Research School at DLR
  5. Belspo
  6. ESA through the PRODEX EGEM/Biorock project contract [PEA 4000011082]
  7. STFC [ST/R000875/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microorganisms are employed to mine economically important elements from rocks, including the rare earth elements (REEs), used in electronic industries and alloy production. We carried out a mining experiment on the International Space Station to test hypotheses on the bioleaching of REEs from basaltic rock in microgravity and simulated Mars and Earth gravities using three microorganisms and a purposely designed biomining reactor. Sphingomonas desiccabilis enhanced mean leached concentrations of REEs compared to non-biological controls in all gravity conditions. No significant difference in final yields was observed between gravity conditions, showing the efficacy of the process under different gravity regimens. Bacillus subtilis exhibited a reduction in bioleaching efficacy and Cupriavidus metallidurans showed no difference compared to non-biological controls, showing the microbial specificity of the process, as on Earth. These data demonstrate the potential for space biomining and the principles of a reactor to advance human industry and mining beyond Earth. Rare earth elements are used in electronics, but increase in demand could lead to low supply. Here the authors conduct experiments on the International Space Station and show microbes can extract rare elements from rocks at low gravity, a finding that could extend mining potential to other planets.

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

4.8
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