Bergey's Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria 2018
DOI: 10.1002/9781118960608.gbm01452
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

S yntrophaceticus

Abstract: Syn.troph.a.ce'ti.cus. Gr. prep. syn , in company with, together with; Gr. n. trophos , feeder, rearer, one who feeds; L. n. acetum , vinegar; L. masc. suff. ‐icus , suffix used with the sense of pertaining to; N.L. masc. n. Syntrophaceticus , syntrophic acetate feeder. Firmicutes / Clostridia / Thermoanaerobacterales / incertae Sedis / Syntrophaceticus … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 25 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The most abundant genus across substrates and temperature was Syntrophaceticus , despite being barely detected in ADs treating wastewater sludge. The type strain of this genus, S. schinkii Sp3 T , is an acetate-oxidizing syntroph that thrives, and has a competitive advantage, under high ammonium concentrations (up to 8,400 mgN/L) 54,55 . The lack of Syntrophaceticus in ADs treating wastewater sludge may therefore be explained by lower ammonium concentrations in these ADs (1,617±4,312 mgN/L, n=145) compared to those treating food waste (2,913±1,681 mgN/L, n=33), and manure (3,449±933 mgN/L, n=18).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most abundant genus across substrates and temperature was Syntrophaceticus , despite being barely detected in ADs treating wastewater sludge. The type strain of this genus, S. schinkii Sp3 T , is an acetate-oxidizing syntroph that thrives, and has a competitive advantage, under high ammonium concentrations (up to 8,400 mgN/L) 54,55 . The lack of Syntrophaceticus in ADs treating wastewater sludge may therefore be explained by lower ammonium concentrations in these ADs (1,617±4,312 mgN/L, n=145) compared to those treating food waste (2,913±1,681 mgN/L, n=33), and manure (3,449±933 mgN/L, n=18).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%