ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025
Determining biocide efficacy for treating established sulfate-reducing biofilms using flow cell systems.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Sulfate-reducing microorganisms (SRM) can contribute to souring and to the corrosion of infrastructure built to support many industrial operations, including in aquatic environments. While chemicals such as biocides can effectively treat planktonic cells, less is known about biocide efficacy for treating established biofilms potentially plaguing infrastructure. We used a biofilm flow cell system to examine the efficacy of sodium nitroprusside (SNP, a nitrosating compound proposed as a "green" biocide) and alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride (ADBAC), a membrane-disrupting biocide used across many sectors, to mitigate existing SRM biofilms. Biofilms were treated with various amounts of SNP (15-750 ppm) or ADBAC (25-500 ppm) for 10-14 h. Biofilm responses were tracked by measuring sulfide concentrations and were also analyzed for microbial community composition and by microscopy. Planktonic SRM cultures were inhibited by 15 ppm SNP, while biofilms were only transiently inhibited by 15-750 ppm SNP. Planktonic cultures were inhibited by 10 ppm ADBAC, but 50 ppm ADBAC did not suppress sulfide production in existing biofilms. ADBAC added at 100 ppm to the biofilms showed transient inhibition while the 250 and 500 ppm treatments completely inhibited sulfidogenesis. Two-photon microscopy showed primarily viable cells following the 50 ppm ADBAC treatments, a mix of viable and non-viable cells following the 100 ppm ADBAC treatment, and non-viable cells following the 250 and 500 ppm ADBAC treatments, confirmed by quantitative analysis of the images. 16S rRNA gene sequencing showed the prevalence of
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.