ArticleJournal of environmental health science & engineering2020
"Bacterial consortium from hydrothermal vent sediments presents electrogenic activity achieved under sulfate reducing conditions in a microbial fuel cell".
Article in Journal of environmental health science & engineering, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Harnessing sulfate-reducing bacteria with plants growing to revitalize metal-tainted coal mine soils in Midwest China: metal sequestration performance, ecological networking interaction, and functional enzymatic prediction.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Potential of Sewage Sludge Mycobiome to Degrade High Diclofenac and Bisphenol-A Concentrations.Toxics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the present work was to assess the electrogenic activity of bacteria from hydrothermal vent sediments achieved under sulfate reducing (SR) conditions in a microbial fuel cell design with acetate, propionate and butyrate as electron donors.
methodsTwo different mixtures of volatile fatty acids (VFA) were evaluated as the carbon source at two chemical oxygen demand (COD) proportions. The mixtures of VFA used were: acetate, propionate and butyrate COD: 3:0.5:0.5 (stage 1) and acetate - butyrate COD: 3.5:0.5 (stage 2). Periodical analysis of sulfate (SO
resultsPercentage of SR was of 97.5 ± 0.7 and 74.3 ± 1.5% for stage 1 and 2, respectively. The % COD removal was of 91 ± 2.1 and 75.3 ± 9.6 for stage 1 and 2, respectively. Although SR and COD removal were higher at stage 1, in regards of energy, stage 2 presented higher current and power densities and Coulombic efficiency as follows: 741.7 ± 30.5 μA/m
conclusionsIt was demonstrated that microorganisms prevenient from hydrothermal vent sediments adapted to a microbial fuel cell system are able to generate electricity coupled to 74.3 ± 1.5 and 75.3 ± 9.6% of SR and COD removal respectively, with a mixture of acetate - butyrate.
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.