4.4 Article

Isolation and identification of Penicillium chrysogenum strain Y5 and its copper extraction characterization from waste printed circuit boards

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOSCIENCE AND BIOENGINEERING
卷 126, 期 1, 页码 78-87

出版社

SOC BIOSCIENCE BIOENGINEERING JAPAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2018.02.001

关键词

Penicillium chrysogenum; Parameter optimization; Bioleaching processes; Waste printed circuit boards; Transmission electron microscope

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31470230, 51320105006, 51604308]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central University of Central South University [2017zzts369]
  3. Youth Talent Foundation of Hunan Province of China [2017RS3003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biohydrometallurgy is generally considered as a green technology for the recycling of industrial solid waste. In this study, an indigenous fungal strain named Y5 with the ability of high-yielding organic acids was isolated and applied in bioleaching of waste printed circuit boards (PCBs). The strain Y5 was identified as Penidilium chrysogenum by morphological and molecular identification. Meanwhile, we investigated that an optimal set of culturing conditions for the fungal growth and acids secretion was 15 g/L glucose with initial pH 5.0, temperature 25 degrees C and shaking speed 120 rpm in shaken flasks culture. Moreover, three bioleaching processes such as one-step, two-step and spent medium processes were conducted to extract copper from waste PCBs. Spent medium bioleaching showed higher copper extraction percentage and it was 47% under 5%(w/v) pulp density. Transmission electron microscope (TEM) observation combining with energy dispersive analysis of X-rays (EDAX) showed that the leached metal ions did not obviously damage the hypha cells. All above results indicated that P. chrysogenum strain Y5 has the tolerance to metal ions, suggesting its potential in recycling of metals from waste PCBs in industry. (C) 2018, The Society for Biotechnology, Japan. 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

4.4
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