| Literature DB >> 24391629 |
Thomas E Hanson1, George W Luther2, Alyssa J Findlay3, Daniel J Macdonald4, Daniel Hess4.
Abstract
Previously, we presented data that indicated microbial sulfide oxidation would out-compete strictly chemical, abiotic sulfide oxidation reactions under nearly all conditions relevant to extant ecosystems (Luther et al., 2011). In particular, we showed how anaerobic microbial sulfide oxidation rates were several orders of magnitude higher than even metal catalyzed aerobic sulfide oxidation processes. The fact that biotic anaerobic sulfide oxidation is kinetically superior to abiotic reactions implies that nearly all anaerobic and sulfidic environments should host microbial populations that oxidize sulfide at appreciable rates. This was likely an important biogeochemical process during long stretches of euxinia in the oceans suggested by the geologic record. In particular, phototrophic sulfide oxidation allows the utilization of carbon dioxide as the electron acceptor suggesting that this process should be particularly widespread rather than relying on the presence of other chemical oxidants. Using the Chesapeake Bay as an example, we argue that phototrophic sulfide oxidation may be more important in many environments than is currently appreciated. Finally, we present methodological considerations to assist other groups that wish to study this process.Entities:
Keywords: Chesapeake Bay; euxinia; phototrophic bacteria; sulfide oxidation; voltammetry
Year: 2013 PMID: 24391629 PMCID: PMC3867655 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00382
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Figure 1A simplified conceptual model for the progressive transition from an early anoxic ocean (blue) to modern oxygenated oceans (green). The dashed line indicates the depth of the photic zone. The chemistry and microbiology of the transient anoxia that develops in the Chesapeake Bay on an annual basis will be used in this project as a proxy for the last transitional stage. The group has access to samples and data from the Black Sea chemocline and Bahamian sink holes that are thought to represent additional transition stages.
Figure 2A demonstration of light-stimulated sulfide oxidation in a shipboard incubation experiment with Chesapeake Bay waters. Light intensity indicates the measured incident PAR for the incubation experiment. Rates were determined by linear regression of [HS−] vs. time for incubations under each condition. Error bars are the standard deviation of rates calculated from at least two independent incubations.
Figure 3Schematic of experimental apparatus for reproducibly measuring phototrophic sulfide uptake. Details for particular components are provided in the text. “Reference,” “counter,” and “working” refer to the electrodes of the electrochemical analyzer system.
Figure 4Inter-laboratory comparison of sulfide uptake rates for washed cell suspensions of . Sulfide uptake rates were assayed at 50–60 μ M initial HS- concentration at 5 μ Ei m−2 s−1 PAR flux with a biomass concentration of 5 (μ g protein) ml−1. Error bars represent the standard error of the data set (n = 10 for Lewes, DE and 27 for Newark, DE).