4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Bioleaching of arsenopyrite by mixed cultures of iron-oxidizing and sulfur-oxidizing microorganisms

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 185, 期 -, 页码 403-411

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.07.037

关键词

Arsenopyrite; Bioleaching; Mixed culture; Iron-oxidizing and sulfur-oxidizing; Community structure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51374249]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China (973) [2010CB630903]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of Central South University [2016zzts469]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Arsenic is a critical environmental pollutant associated with acid mine drainage. Arsenopyrite is one of the major arsenic sulfide minerals whose weathering lead to the contamination of arsenic. In this study, the leaching behaviors of arsenopyrite by two mixed cultures of iron-oxidizing and sulfur-oxidizing microorganisms (Ferroplasma thermophilum and Acidithiobacillus caldus, Sulfobacillus thermosulfidooxidans and Acidithiobacillus caldus) were investigated, accompanying with community structure analysis of free microorganisms. The ratio of F. thermophilum to A. caldus of 1/1 showed a more favorable effect on the arsenic leaching than other ratios, and F thermophilum played a dominant role in the solution all the leaching time. While adding A. caldus in the S. thermosulfidooxidans bioleaching system, the dissolution of arsenopyrite was suppressed. Notably, when the ratio of S. thermosulfidooxidans to A. caldus was 2/1, the arsenic extraction was accelerated at the early stage, but later it slowed down. The reason was because A. caldus was the predominant species at the later stage which made the redox potential decrease faster. XRD demonstrated that the proper addition of A. caldus could eliminate the sulfur passivation and promote the leaching in a degree. These studies are helpful to evaluate the environmental impact of arsenic. (C) 2017 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