ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2015
Optimization of a bioremediation system of soluble uranium based on the biostimulation of an indigenous bacterial community.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application Progress ofIndian journal of microbiology · 2021Review
- pH-dependent microbial reduction of uranium(VI) in carbonate-free solutions: UV-vis, XPS, TEM, and thermodynamic studies.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
- Utilization of phosphate rock as a sole source of phosphorus for uranium biomineralization mediated byRSC advances · 2018Article
- Comparative genomics analysis of the companion mechanisms of Bacillus thuringiensis Bc601 and Bacillus endophyticus Hbe603 in bacterial consortium.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Unraveling interactions in microbial communities - from co-cultures to microbiomes.Journal of microbiology (Seoul, Korea) · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High concentrations of uranium(VI) in the Witwatersrand Basin, South Africa from mining leachate is a serious environmental concern. Treatment systems are often ineffective. Therefore, optimization of a bioremediation system that facilitates the bioreduction of U(VI) based on biostimulation of indigenous bacterial communities can be a viable alternative. Tolerance of the indigenous bacteria to high concentrations of U and the amount of citric acid required for U removal was optimized. Two bioreactor studies which showed effective U(VI) removal more than 99 % from low (0.0037 mg L(-1)) and high (10 mg L(-1)) concentrations of U to below the limit allowed by South African National Standards for drinking water (0.0015 mg L(-1)). The second bioreactor was able to successfully adapt even with increasing levels of U(VI) feed water up to 10 mg L(-1), provided that enough electron donor was available. Molecular biology analyses identified Desulfovibrio sp. and Geobacter sp. among known species, which are known to reduce U(VI). The mineralogical analysis determined that part of the uranium precipitated intracellularly, which meant that the remaining U(VI) was precipitated as U(IV) oxides and TEM-EDS also confirmed this analysis. This was predicted with the geochemical model from the chemical data, which demonstrated that the treated drainage was supersaturated with respect to uraninite > U4O9 > U3O8 > UO2(am). Therefore, the tolerance of the indigenous bacterial community could be optimized to remediate up to 10 mg L(-1), and the system can thus be upscaled and employed for remediation of U(VI) impacted sites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25548012What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.