Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33057031›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Plant secondary metabolites induced electron flux in microbial fuel cell: investigation from laboratory-to-field scale.

Dibyojyoty Nath, M M Ghangrekar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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.

Dibyojyoty NathSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, 721302, India.
M M GhangrekarSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, 721302, India. ghangrekar@civil.iitkgp.ac.in.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wastewater treatment coupled with electricity recovery in microbial fuel cell (MFC) prefer mixed anaerobic sludge as inoculum in anodic chamber than pure stain of electroactive bacteria (EAB), due to robustness and syntrophic association. Genetic modification is difficult to adopt for mixed sludge microbes for enhancing power production of MFC. Hence, we demonstrated use of eco-friendly plant secondary metabolites (PSM) with sub-lethal concentrations to enhance the rate of extracellular electron transfer between EAB and anode and validated it in both bench-scale as well as pilot-scale MFCs. The PSMs contain tannin, saponin and essential oils, which are having electron shuttling properties and their addition to microbes can cause alteration in cell morphology, electroactive behaviour and shifting in microbial population dynamics depending upon concentrations and types of PSM used. Improvement of 2.1-times and 3.8-times in power densities was observed in two different MFCs inoculated with Eucalyptus-extract pre-treated mixed anaerobic sludge and pure culture of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, respectively, as compared to respective control MFCs operated without adding Eucalyptus-extract to inoculum. When Eucalyptus-extract-dose was spiked to anodic chamber (125 l) of pilot-scale MFC, treating septage, the current production was dramatically improved. Thus, PSM-dosing to inoculum holds exciting promise for increasing electricity production of field-scale MFCs.

Indexed as

Bioelectric Energy SourcesBiofilmsElectricityElectrodesElectronsEucalyptusLaboratoriesPlant ExtractsPseudomonas aeruginosaSecondary MetabolismSewagePlant ExtractsSewage

Identifiers

PMID33057031
PMCPMC7560832

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.