ArticleEnvironmental technology2016
Iron-mineral accretion from acid mine drainage and its application in passive treatment.
Article in Environmental technology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Synoptic sampling and principal components analysis to identify sources of water and metals to an acid mine drainage stream.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study demonstrates substantial removal of iron (Fe) from acid mine drainage (pH ≈3) in a passive vertical flow reactor (VFR) with an equivalent footprint of 154 m(2) per L/s mine water and residence times of >23 h. Average Fe removal rate was 67% with a high of 85% over the 10-month trial. The fraction of Fe passing a 0.22 µm filter (referred to here as Fe-filt) was seen to be removed in the VFR even when Fe(II) was absent, indicating that the contribution of microbial Fe(II) oxidation and precipitation was not the dominant removal mechanism in the VFR. Removal rates of Fe-filt in the VFR were up to 70% in residence times as low as 8 h compared with laboratory experiments where much smaller changes in Fe-filt were observed over 60 h. Centrifugation indicated that 80-90% of the influent Fe had particle sizes <35 nm. Together with analyses and geochemical modelling, this suggests that the Fe-filt fraction exists as either truly aqueous (but oversaturated) Fe(III) or nanoparticulate Fe(III) and that this metastability persists. When the water was contacted with VFR sludge, the Fe-filt fraction was destabilized, leading to an appreciably higher removal of this fraction. Heterogeneous precipitation and/or aggregation of nanoparticulate Fe(III) precipitates are considered predominant removal mechanisms. Microbial analyses of the mine water revealed the abundance of extracellular polymeric substance-generating Fe-oxidizing bacterium 'Ferrovum myxofaciens', which may aid the removal of iron and explain the unusual appearance and physical properties of the sludge.
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.