ArticleMicrobial ecology2015
Deciphering Cyanide-Degrading Potential of Bacterial Community Associated with the Coking Wastewater Treatment Plant with a Novel Draft Genome.
Article in Microbial ecology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbial community composition and function prediction involved in the hydrolytic bioreactor of coking wastewater treatment process.Archives of microbiology · 2022Article
- Bioremediation of cyanide-containing wastes: The potential of systems and synthetic biology for cleaning up the toxic leftovers from mining.EMBO reports · 2021Article
- Effect of metabolic uncouplers on the performance of toluene-degrading biotrickling filter.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
- Bacterial community structure in rotating biological contactor treating coke wastewater in relation to medium composition.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biotreatment processes fed with coking wastewater often encounter insufficient removal of pollutants, such as ammonia, phenols, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), especially for cyanides. However, only a limited number of bacterial species in pure cultures have been confirmed to metabolize cyanides, which hinders the improvement of these processes. In this study, a microbial community of activated sludge enriched in a coking wastewater treatment plant was analyzed using 454 pyrosequencing and Illumina sequencing to characterize the potential cyanide-degrading bacteria. According to the classification of these pyro-tags, targeting V3/V4 regions of 16S rRNA gene, half of them were assigned to the family Xanthomonadaceae, implying that Xanthomonadaceae bacteria are well-adapted to coking wastewater. A nearly complete draft genome of the dominant bacterium was reconstructed from metagenome of this community to explore cyanide metabolism based on analysis of the genome. The assembled 16S rRNA gene from this draft genome showed that this bacterium was a novel species of Thermomonas within Xanthomonadaceae, which was further verified by comparative genomics. The annotation using KEGG and Pfam identified genes related to cyanide metabolism, including genes responsible for the iron-harvesting system, cyanide-insensitive terminal oxidase, cyanide hydrolase/nitrilase, and thiosulfate:cyanide transferase. Phylogenetic analysis showed that these genes had homologs in previously identified genomes of bacteria within Xanthomonadaceae and even presented similar gene cassettes, thus implying an inherent cyanide-decomposing potential. The findings of this study expand our knowledge about the bacterial degradation of cyanide compounds and will be helpful in the remediation of cyanides contamination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.