Low-temperature sulphate reduction: biological versus abiological

Trudinger, P. A.; Chambers, L. A.; Smith, Jennifer

doi:10.1139/e85-207

Cited by 207 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These variable δ 34 S values within a micro-scale area are considered to be the evidence of sulfate reduction in sediments during early diagenesis. Dissolved sulfate may have been reduced to sulfide either by an abiological or biological process (Trudinger and Chamber, 1985;Goldhaber and Orr, 1995;Ohmoto and Goldhaber, 1997). Because the Jeerinah samples preserved original sedimentary textures and do not show any features of hydrothermal alteration, abiological (thermochemical) sulfate reduction is unlikely to explain the sulfur isotope heterogeneity shown in Fig.…”

Section: Origin Of Pyrite In the Jeerinah Formation And Activity Of Smentioning

confidence: 97%

Sulfur and carbon isotope analyses of the 2.7Ga Jeerinah Formation, Fortescue Group, Australia.

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfur and carbon isotope ratios have been determined on carbonaceous shales of the 2.7 Ga Jeerinah Formation, Hamersley Group, Australia. The analyses were performed using the Nd-YAG laser microprobe method.The δ 13 C (PDB) values of organic matter range from -38.3‰ to -35.1‰ with an average of -37.0‰ (44 analyses). These carbon isotope compositions support the previously proposed hypothesis that methanogens and methanotrophs were involved in the carbon cycles in the 2.7 Ga Hamersley ocean. Sulfur isotope compositions are ranging from +0.4‰ to +10.2‰ with an average of +4.6‰ (90 analyses). A notable feature is variable δ 34 S values within a micro-scale area; approximately 6 to 7‰ variations of δ 34 S values were detected within 5 × 5 mm areas. Such δ 34 S variations clearly indicate that pyrites in the Jeerinah shales were formed as a result of the sulfate reduction. This suggests that the 2.7 Ga Hamersley ocean contained appreciable amount of dissolved sulfate, opposing to the previously popular H 2 S-rich ocean model. Because of no evidence for the hydrothermal alterration on the examined samples, pyrites in the 2.7 Ga Jeerinah shales were most likely formed by the biological sulfate reduction in sediments.ganisms were active in the 2.7 Ga ocean and that these organisms played an important role in the global carbon cycle. These suggestions were based on the discovery of organic matter with extremely light δ 13 C values, -60 to -40‰, in some sedimentary rocks in the Hamersley Basin in Australia, in the Abitibi greenstone belt in Canada and the Transvaal basin in South Africa (Hayes et al

show abstract

Section: Origin Of Pyrite In the Jeerinah Formation And Activity Of Smentioning

confidence: 97%

Sulfur and carbon isotope analyses of the 2.7Ga Jeerinah Formation, Fortescue Group, Australia.

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since then, a range of similar laboratory experiments with sulfate reactants and the control of various physicochemical parameters to simulate geological conditions have been conducted to study TSR processes and better understand the composition of TSR impacted gas reservoirs (Kiyosu, 1980;Trudinger et al, 1985;Kiyosu and Krouse, 1993;Cross et al, 2004;Yue et al, 2005;Ding et al, 2007;Zhang et al, 2007Zhang et al, , 2008aChen et al, 2009;Lu et al, 2010). Notably, MgSO 4 has been shown to rapidly accelerate TSR at relatively low temperatures (<350°C) and without the need for additional reduced sulfur (Gillaizeau and Tang, 2001;Tang et al, 2005;Zhang et al, 2007Zhang et al, , 2008a (Zhang et al, 2007(Zhang et al, , 2008a.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of metal sulfates in thermochemical sulfate reduction (TSR) of hydrocarbons: Insight from the yields and stable carbon isotopes of gas products

Lü

Greenwood

Chen

et al. 2011

Organic Geochemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The sample blank might not only be caused by the contaminant sulfur compound but also through thermochemical sulfate reduction (TSR). Machel (2001) and Trudinger et al (1985) have shown that TSR can take place in the presence of a strong reducing agent even at temperatures well below 200°C. Divalent chromium is a strong reducer and the walls of the reaction flask certainly reach temperatures above 100°C.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A cold chromium distillation procedure for radiolabeled sulfide applied to sulfate reduction measurements

Kallmeyer¹,

Ferdelman²,

Weber³

et al. 2004

Limnology & Ocean Methods

283

250

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dissimilatory sulfate reduction (DSR) is a key process in the anaerobic degradation of organic matter in marine sediments. The overall reaction can be written as 2 CH 2 O + SO 4 2-→ 2 HCO 3 -+ H 2 S.Sulfate-reducing bacteria reduce sulfate to sulfide, which either remains in solution as hydrogen sulfide or precipitates as various forms of metal (mostly iron), mono-and disulfides, or elemental sulfur (ES). These combined inorganic end products of sulfate reduction are termed total reduced inorganic sulfur (TRIS). The importance of DSR as a terminal electron acceptor process in marine sediments has been established through measurements of sulfate reduction rates (SRR) by using carrier-free radiolabeled 2-radiotracer into the undisturbed sediment followed by incubation for hours to days. Incubations may be terminated by freezing or transferring the radiolabeled sediment into 20% (w/v) zinc acetate solution. By comparing the activity of the radiolabeled TRIS to the total sulfate radiotracer a reduction rate can be calculated as shown below in Eq. 1.(1) a TOT t where SRR is the sulfate reduction rate (nmol cm -3 d -1); [SO 4 ] is the sulfate concentration in the porewater of the sediment sample (mmol L -1 ); P SED is the porosity of the sediment (mL porewater cm -3 sediment); a TRIS is radioactivity of TRIS (counts per minute [cpm] or decays per minute [dpm]); a TOT is total radioactivity used (cpm or dpm); t is incubation time in days; 1.06 is the correction factor for the expected isotopic fractionation (Jørgensen and Fenchel 1974); 1000 is the factor for the change of units from mmol L -1 to nmol cm AbstractThe separation and detection of extremely small amounts of radiolabeled reduced sulfur species for the determination of very low sulfate reduction rates (SRR) with the 35 SO 4 2-radiotracer was improved by optimization of the entire distillation and detection process. By reducing the amount of background radioactivity, the threshold from which turnover of radiotracer can be detected was lowered considerably. Reduction of the background radioactivity was achieved by (1) reducing cross-contamination between distillations by modifying the distillation setup, and (2) preventing an unidentified 35 S-containing compound that greatly contributes to the background from reaching the final trap by lowering the distillation temperature. These improvements allow the measurement of low SRR, shorter incubation times, and the use of less radiotracer. Experiments with pure sulfur minerals and a variety of sediments verified that the efficiency of the new method is equal to the hot single-step chromium reduction method, but with a greatly improved reproducibility.

show abstract

Low-temperature sulphate reduction: biological versus abiological

Cited by 207 publications

References 36 publications

Sulfur and carbon isotope analyses of the 2.7Ga Jeerinah Formation, Fortescue Group, Australia.

Sulfur and carbon isotope analyses of the 2.7Ga Jeerinah Formation, Fortescue Group, Australia.

The role of metal sulfates in thermochemical sulfate reduction (TSR) of hydrocarbons: Insight from the yields and stable carbon isotopes of gas products

A cold chromium distillation procedure for radiolabeled sulfide applied to sulfate reduction measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About