4.5 Article

Effects of hydrogen and acetate on benzene mineralisation under sulphate-reducing conditions

期刊

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY ECOLOGY
卷 77, 期 2, 页码 238-247

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01101.x

关键词

anaerobic benzene mineralisation; syntrophy; interspecies metabolite transfer; Pelotomaculum

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [1319]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Syntrophic mineralisation of benzene, as recently proposed for a sulphate-reducing enrichment culture, was tested in product inhibition experiments with acetate and hydrogen, both putative intermediates of anaerobic benzene fermentation. Using [(13)C(6)]-benzene enabled tracking the inhibition of benzene mineralisation sensitively by analysis of (13)CO(2). In noninhibited cultures, hydrogen was detected at partial pressures of 2.4 x 10(-6) +/- 1.5 x 10(-6) atm. Acetate was detected at concentrations of 17 +/- 2 mu M. Spiking with 0.1 atm hydrogen produced a transient inhibitory effect on (13)CO(2) formation. In cultures spiked with higher amounts of hydrogen, benzene mineralisation did not restart after hydrogen consumption, possibly due to the toxic effects of the sulphide produced. An inhibitory effect was also observed when acetate was added to the cultures (0.3, 3.5 and 30 mM). Benzene mineralisation resumed after acetate was degraded to concentrations found in noninhibited cultures, indicating that acetate is another key intermediate in anaerobic benzene mineralisation. Although benzene mineralisation by a single sulphate reducer cannot be ruled out, our results strongly point to an involvement of syntrophic interactions in the process. Thermodynamic calculations revealed that, under in situ conditions, benzene fermentation to hydrogen and acetate yielded a free energy change of Delta G' = - 83.1 +/- 5.6 kJ mol(-1). Benzene mineralisation ceased when Delta G' values declined below - 61.3 +/- 5.3 kJ mol(-1) in the presence of acetate, indicating that ATP-consuming reactions are involved in the pathway.

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

4.5
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