4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Microbial oxidation of antimonite and arsenite by bacteria isolated from antimony-contaminated soils

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 42, 期 45, 页码 27832-27842

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.056

关键词

Antimony(III); Arsenic(III); Microbial oxidation; Bacteria; Bioremediation

资金

  1. Brain Korea 21 Plus Project in the Division of Creative Low Impact Development and Management for Ocean Port City Infrastructures [21A20132012304]
  2. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [NRF-2015R1A2A1A15054528]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [21A20132012304, 2015R1A2A1A15054528] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two Sb(III)-oxidizing bacteria were isolated from Sb(III)-contaminated soil. By analyzing the 16S rRNA gene, two isolated strains were designated Shinella sp. NLS1 and Ensifer sp. NLS4. Both strains could oxidize Sb(III) to produce Sb(V) under nutrient-limited conditions. Kinetic studies indicated the NLS1 Sb(III) oxidation rate (V-max = 0.28 mu M min(-1), K-m = 279.13 mu M) was comparable to that of NLS4 (V-max = 0.32 mu M min(-1), Km = 248.43 mu M). NLS1 could also perform aerobic As(III) oxidation and simultaneous oxidation of Sb(III) and As(III). NLS4 was able to perform Sb(III) oxidation under anaerobic conditions with nitrate as an electron acceptor. NLS1 possesses the aioA gene, which might function as both arsenite and antimonite oxidase, whereas strain NLS4 does not. This implies that Sb(III) oxidation in strains NLS1 and NLS4 occurred through two different pathways. This study demonstrates the potential of both isolates for bioremediation of Sb-contaminated sites. (C) 2017 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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