Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42798786›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2026

Methanotrophic microbiomes for dilute coal-mine methane biofiltration: ecophysiological constraints and design priorities.

Junjie Wei, Haoyang Ren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Junjie WeiSchool of Intelligent Engineering, Shandong Management University, Jinan, China.
Haoyang RenSchool of Intelligent Engineering, Shandong Management University, Jinan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dilute methane from coal-mine ventilation, drainage systems, and abandoned workings is difficult to treat because low methane partial pressure coincides with high or variable gas flow, short feasible residence times, fluctuating temperature and humidity, nutrient scarcity, and dust or trace contaminants. Aerobic methanotrophs can oxidize methane under moderate conditions, but mine-relevant performance cannot be inferred from isolate activity or gas-phase removal efficiency alone. This Mini Review organizes evidence by coal-mine source class and examines how methanotroph ecophysiology, partner organisms, carrier properties, hydrated biofilm structure, and gas transfer constrain sub-percent methane treatment. Mine-targeted studies comprise laboratory gas-phase reactors, mine-derived enrichments, batch experiments, and recent devices; no long-term validation under authentic mine-gas operation was identified in the targeted literature search. Transferable evidence comes from packed-bed reactors, landfill and compost systems, soils, and defined communities. These studies identify candidate traits that require mine-specific testing, including activity at the target methane partial pressure, recovery after starvation, nutrient economy, attachment, and stress tolerance. We propose source-matched functional microbiomes, activity-resolved methane balances, structured carriers, standardized reactor metrics, and explicit, site-specific no-go conditions as development priorities. Biofiltration should not advance where safe oxygen availability, practicable residence time, acceptable backpressure, or sustainable water and nutrient supply cannot be reconciled with mine operation.

Indexed as

biofilm mass transferbiofiltrationcoal-mine methanelow-concentration methanemethanotrophic microbiomemicrobial consortiaventilation air methane

Identifiers

PMID42798786
PMCPMC13613084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.