ArticleBMC microbiology2017
Electrochemical performance and microbial community profiles in microbial fuel cells in relation to electron transfer mechanisms.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 105 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating electroactive microorganisms into active soil management strategies.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Microbiological aspects of microbial electrolysis cells: Isolation, screening, and electron transfer mechanisms.AIMS microbiology · 2026Review
- Article
- Influence of support materials on the electroactive behavior, structure and gene expression of wild type and GSU1771-deficient mutant of Geobacter sulfurreducens biofilms.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025Article
- Single-cell phenotyping of extracellular electron transfer via microdroplet encapsulation.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Single-Cell Phenotyping of Extracellular Electron Transfer via Microdroplet Encapsulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Power of microbes: utilization of improvised microbial fuel cell (IMFC) as an interdisciplinary learning activity in teaching bioelectricity.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
- N-Doped Carbon Nanowire-Modified Macroporous Carbon Foam Microbial Fuel Cell Anode: Enrichment of Exoelectrogens and Enhancement of Extracellular Electron Transfer.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Current production by non-methanotrophic bacteria enriched from an anaerobic methane-oxidizing microbial community.Biofilm · 2021Article
- Differences in Applied Redox Potential on Cathodes Enrich for Diverse Electrochemically Active Microbial Isolates From a Marine Sediment.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicrobial fuel cells (MFCs) operating with complex microbial communities have been extensively reported in the past, and are commonly used in applications such as wastewater treatment, bioremediation or in-situ powering of environmental sensors. However, our knowledge on how the composition of the microbial community and the different types of electron transfer to the anode affect the performance of these bioelectrochemical systems is far from complete. To fill this gap of knowledge, we designed a set of three MFCs with different constrains limiting direct and mediated electron transfer to the anode.
resultsThe results obtained indicate that MFCs with a naked anode on which a biofilm was allowed unrestricted development (MFC-A) had the most diverse archaeal and bacterial community, and offered the best performance. In this MFC both, direct and mediated electron transfer, occurred simultaneously, but direct electron transfer was the predominant mechanism. Microbial fuel cells in which the anode was enclosed in a dialysis membrane and biofilm was not allowed to develop (MFC-D), had a much lower power output (about 60% lower), and a prevalence of dissolved redox species that acted as putative electron shuttles. In the anolyte of this MFC, Arcobacter and Methanosaeta were the prevalent bacteria and archaea respectively. In the third MFC, in which the anode had been covered by a cation selective nafion membrane (MFC-N), power output decreased a further 5% (95% less than MFC-A). In this MFC, conventional organic electron shuttles could not operate and the low power output obtained was presumably attributed to fermentation end-products produced by some of the organisms present in the anolyte, probably Pseudomonas or Methanosaeta.
conclusionElectron transfer mechanisms have an impact on the development of different microbial communities and in turn on MFC performance. Although a stable current was achieved in all cases, direct electron transfer MFC showed the best performance concluding that biofilms are the major contributors to current production in MFCs. Characterization of the complex microbial assemblages in these systems may help us to unveil new electrogenic microorganisms and improve our understanding on their role to the functioning of MFCs.
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.