Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23124766›Full record

ArticleMicrobes and environments2013

Impact of chloramination on the development of laboratory-grown biofilms fed with filter-pretreated groundwater.

Fangqiong Ling, Wen-Tso Liu

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Microbes and environments, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fangqiong LingDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA.
Wen-Tso Liu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated the continuous impact of monochloramine disinfection on laboratory-grown biofilms through the characterization of biofilm architecture and microbial community structure. Biofilm development and disinfection were achieved using CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) biofilm reactor systems with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) coupons as the substratum and sand filter-pretreated groundwater as the source of microbial seeding and growth nutrient. After 2 weeks of growth, the biofilms were subjected to chloramination for 8 more weeks at concentrations of 7.5±1.4 to 9.1±0.4 mg Cl2 L(-1). Control reactors received no disinfection during the development of biofilms. Confocal laser scanning microscopy and image analysis indicated that chloramination could lead to 81.4-83.5% and 86.3-95.6% reduction in biofilm biomass and thickness, respectively, but could not eliminate biofilm growth. 16S rRNA gene terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis indicated that microbial community structures between chloraminated and non-chloraminated biofilms exhibited different successional trends. 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing analysis further revealed that chloramination could select members of Actinobacteria and Acidobacteria as the dominant populations, whereas natural development leads to the selection of members of Nitrospira and Bacteroidetes as dominant biofilm populations. Overall, chloramination treatment could alter the growth of multi-species biofilms on the PVC surface, shape the biofilm architecture, and select a certain microbial community that can survive or proliferate under chloramination.

Indexed as

BacteriaBiofilmsChloraminesDisinfectantsDisinfectionDrinking WaterFiltrationGroundwaterPolymorphism, Restriction Fragment LengthRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNAchloramineChloraminesDisinfectantsDrinking WaterRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID23124766
PMCPMC4070696

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.