4.4 Article

Microscopic and Spectroscopic Insights into Uranium Phosphate Mineral Precipitated by Bacillus Mucilaginosus

期刊

ACS EARTH AND SPACE CHEMISTRY
卷 1, 期 8, 页码 483-492

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsearthspacechem.7b00060

关键词

Biomineralization; U(VI); Bacillus mucilaginosus; hydrogen uranyl phosphate; mechanism

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2014CB846003]
  2. China National Natural Science Foundation [41502316]
  3. Doctor Foundation of Southwest University of Science and Technology [15zx7109, 16zx7155, 16zx7154]
  4. Southwest University of Science and Technology [CX16-021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we used spectroscopic and microscopic techniques to investigate the interaction mechanism between uranium and Bacillus mucilaginosus. According to scanning electron microscope couple with energy dispersive X-ray detector analysis, the lamellar uranium phosphate precipitation was only observed on the living B. mucilaginosus and the resting B. mucilaginosus. The Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy spectrum also indicated the important role of phosphate groups in forming U(VI)-phosphates precipitation. The X-ray diffraction analysis identified the phase of U(VI)-phosphate precipitation as H3OUO2PO4 center dot 3H(2)O. Batch experiment showed that biominerilization amount could be up to 195.84 mg/g when exposing living B. mucilaginosus to U(VI) aqueous solution at pH 5.0 for 1 h. The precipitate was further evidenced by extended X-ray absorption fine structure spectra based on the presence of U-P shell, which demonstrated that hydrogen uranyl phosphate became the main products on the living B. mucilaginosus with prolonged reacting time. After ashing and hydrothermal process, the precipitated U(VI) on B. mucilaginosus could be converted into UO2 and K(UO2)(PO4)center dot 3H(2)O. Our findings have significant implications in elucidating the potential role of bacteria in the migration of uranium in geological environment.

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

4.4
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