| Title |
Analogies and differences among bacterial and viral disinfection by the photo-Fenton process at neutral pH: a mini review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-017-0926-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefanos Giannakis |
| Abstract |
Over the last years, the photo-Fenton process has been established as an effective, green alternative to chemical disinfection of waters and wastewaters. Microorganisms' inactivation is the latest success story in the application of this process at near-neutral pH, albeit without clearly elucidated inactivation mechanisms. In this review, the main pathways of the combined photo-Fenton process against the most frequent pathogen models (Escherichia coli for bacteria and MS2 bacteriophage for viruses) are analyzed. Firstly, the action of solar light is described and the specific inactivation mechanisms in bacteria (internal photo-Fenton) and viruses (genome damage) are presented. The contribution of the external pathways due to the potential presence of organic matter in generating reactive oxygen species (ROS) and their effects on microorganism inactivation are discussed. Afterwards, the effects of the gradual addition of Fe and H2O2 are assessed and the differences among bacterial and viral inactivation are highlighted. As a final step, the simultaneous addition of both reagents induces the photo-Fenton in the bulk, focusing on the differences induced by the homogeneous or heterogeneous fraction of the process and the variation among the two respective targets. This work exploits the accumulated evidence on the mechanisms of bacterial inactivation and the scarce ones towards viral targets, aiming to bridge this knowledge gap and make possible the further application of the photo-Fenton process in the field of water/wastewater treatment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 14% |
| France | 1 | 14% |
| Austria | 1 | 14% |
| Italy | 1 | 14% |
| Ireland | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 27 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 10 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 8% |
| Engineering | 7 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 41 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 04 January 2019.
All research outputs
#6,018,350
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#1,098
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,798
of 446,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#40
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
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 446,906 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.