| Title |
Population Analysis of Mesophilic Microbial Fuel Cells Fed with Carbon Monoxide
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12010-013-0556-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Hussain, G. Bruant, P. Mehta, V. Raghavan, B. Tartakovsky, S. R. Guiot |
| Abstract |
Electricity generation in a microbial fuel cell (MFC) fed with carbon monoxide (CO) has been recently demonstrated; however, the microbial ecology of this system has not yet been described. In this work the diversity of the microbial community present at the anode of CO-fed MFCs was studied by performing denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) and high-throughput sequencing (HTS) analyses. HTS indicated a significant increase of the archaeal genus Methanobacterium and of the bacterial order Clostridiales, notably including Clostridium species, while in both MFCs DGGE identified members of the bacterial genera Geobacter, Desulfovibrio, and Clostridium, and of the archaeal genera Methanobacterium, Methanofollis, and Methanosaeta. In particular, the presence of Geobacter sulfurreducens was identified. Tolerance of G. sulfurreducens to CO was confirmed by growing G. sulfurreducens with acetate under a 100 % CO atmosphere. This observation, along with the identification of acetogens, supports the hypothesis of the two-step process in which CO is converted to acetate by the carboxidotrophic Bacteria and acetate is then oxidized by CO-tolerant electricigenic bacteria to produce electricity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 27% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 27% |
| Engineering | 5 | 19% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,380,628
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#1,771
of 2,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,170
of 210,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#26
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,499 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 210,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.