1984
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.280340103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electron‐transfer coupling in microbial fuel cells: 1. comparison of redox‐mediator reduction rates and respiratory rates of bacteria

Abstract: Redox mediators promote electron transfer in microbial fuel cells. The reduction of a range of redox mediators by bacteria was studied in some detail in order to identify effective mediator—organism combinations. Rates of reduction of mediator dyes by bacteria were measured spectrophotometrically at 30°C under anaerobic conditions for standardised concentrations of organism, substrate and dye. The kinetics of dye reduction showed two general patterns: a simple, exponential curve or a complex curve with an init… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
54
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 187 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
54
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The role of e-proteobacteria, as well as FCBs, in power production remains unconstrained. Geobacter and other d-proteobacteria are known exoelectrogens (Lovley, 2006), and g-proteobacteria, including E. coli, have been shown to be capable of extracellular electron transfer via exogenous electron shuttles (Roller et al, 1984;McKinlay and Zeikus, 2004). As such, these g-proteobacteria may be physiologically capable of exploiting the anode as an electron acceptor, and the data shown here provide evidence for this notion because there is increasing power production in the 0.3 V MFC whereas g-proteobacterial cell densities increase and Geobacter cell densities decrease (though notably the majority of power produced in the 0.3 V MFC occurs after the g-proteobacterial cell density is diminished; Figure 4a).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The role of e-proteobacteria, as well as FCBs, in power production remains unconstrained. Geobacter and other d-proteobacteria are known exoelectrogens (Lovley, 2006), and g-proteobacteria, including E. coli, have been shown to be capable of extracellular electron transfer via exogenous electron shuttles (Roller et al, 1984;McKinlay and Zeikus, 2004). As such, these g-proteobacteria may be physiologically capable of exploiting the anode as an electron acceptor, and the data shown here provide evidence for this notion because there is increasing power production in the 0.3 V MFC whereas g-proteobacterial cell densities increase and Geobacter cell densities decrease (though notably the majority of power produced in the 0.3 V MFC occurs after the g-proteobacterial cell density is diminished; Figure 4a).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An increase of the potential beyond the normal biological boundaries indicates inability of the bacteria to provide electrons at a sufficient rate to avoid electrochemical oxidation of solutes. Electrode surface increase and catalysis (Park and Zeikus, 2003) or mediator addition (Roller et al, 1984) would be the necessary modifications to improve this situation. The reverse process can also be envisaged at a cathode.…”
Section: Bes and Microbial Ecology In The Natural Environmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These conditions arise in the presence of poised-potential electrodes or insoluble minerals, such as iron oxides (3)(4)(5), and in multicellular communities (biofilms) where the formation of chemical gradients leads to oxidant limitation for cells at depth (6)(7)(8)(9). Diverse microbes secrete redoxactive compounds with the capacity to function as electron shuttles (10)(11)(12). In the pathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14, electron-shuttling antibiotics called phenazines support survival on poised-potential electrodes and balance the intracellular redox state of cells in anoxic biofilm subzones (1,9).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%