4.7 Article

Factors influencing the electrokinetic dispersion of PAH-degrading bacteria in a laboratory model aquifer

期刊

APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 80, 期 3, 页码 507-515

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00253-008-1577-0

关键词

electro-bioremediation; viability; PAH; Sphingomonas; propidium iodide; transport

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite growing interest in the electro-bioremediation of contaminated soil it is still largely unknown to which degree weak electric fields influence the fate of contaminant-degrading microorganisms in the sub-surface. Here we evaluate the factors influencing the electrokinetic transport and deposition of fluorene-degrading Sphingomonas sp. LB126 in a laboratory model aquifer exposed to a direct current (DC) electric field (1 V cm(-1)) typically used in electro-bioremediation measures. The influence of cell size, cell membrane integrity, cell chromosome contents (all assessed by flow cytometry), cell surface charge and cell hydrophobicity on the spatial distribution of the suspended and matrix-bound cells after 15 h of DC-treatment was evaluated. In presence of DC the cells were predominantly mobilised by electroosmosis to the cathode with an apparent velocity of 0.6 cm h(-1), whereas a minor fraction only of the cells augmented was mobilised to the anode by electrophoresis. Different electrokinetic behaviour of individual cells could be solely attributed to intra-population heterogeneity of the cell surface charge. In the absence of DC by contrast, a Gaussian-type distribution of bacteria around the point of injection was found. DC had no influence on the deposition efficiency, as the glass beads in presence and absence of an electric field retained quasi-equal fractions of the cells. Propidium iodide staining and flow cytometry analysis of the cells indicated the absence of negative influences of DC on the cell wall integrity of electrokinetically mobilised cells and thus point at unchanged physiological fitness of electrokinetically mobilised bacteria.

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