| Literature DB >> 32438636 |
María José De La Fuente1,2, Leslie K Daille3,2, Rodrigo De la Iglesia3,2, Magdalena Walczak4,2, Francisco Armijo5,2, Gonzalo E Pizarro1,2, Ignacio T Vargas1,2.
Abstract
Microbial electrochemical technologies have revealed the opportunity of electrochemical enrichment for specific bacterial groups that are able to catalyze reactions of interest. However, there are unsolved challenges towards their application under aggressive environmental conditions, such as in the sea. This study demonstrates the impact of surface electrochemical potential on community composition and its corrosivity. Electrochemical bacterial enrichment was successfully carried out in natural seawater without nutrient amendments. Experiments were carried out for ten days of exposure in a closed-flow system over 316L stainless steel electrodes under three different poised potentials (-150 mV, +100 mV, and +310 mV vs. Ag/AgCl). Weight loss and atomic force microscopy showed a significant difference in corrosion when +310 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl) was applied in comparison to that produced under the other tested potentials (and an unpoised control). Bacterial community analysis conducted using 16S rRNA gene profiles showed that poised potentials are more positive as +310 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl) resulted in strong enrichment for Rhodobacteraceae and Sulfitobacter. Hence, even though significant enrichment of the known electrochemically active bacteria from the Rhodobacteraceae family was accomplished, the resultant bacterial community could accelerate pitting corrosion in 316 L stainless steel, thereby compromising the durability of the electrodes and the microbial electrochemical technologies.Entities:
Keywords: marine biocorrosion; microbial enrichment; overpotential; stainless steel
Year: 2020 PMID: 32438636 PMCID: PMC7288148 DOI: 10.3390/ma13102327
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Experimental design. (A) Design of the bottles, indicating seawater inlet and outlet and the arrangement of the AISI 316L Stainless Steel (SS) electrodes, reference electrode, and counter electrode. (B) Dimensions of SS electrodes.
Figure 2Weight loss of SS electrodes under each treatment after 10 days. To determine the significant differences between the treatments, a posteriori Tukey test was performed. Significant differences between treatments are indicated with asterisks, where each asterisk group treatments according to similarity. (A) Weight losses in the initial experiment under biotic conditions. (B) Weight losses under the abiotic and biotic conditions with the +310 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl) potential applied.
Figure 3Roughness of SS electrodes (second experiment), measured by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Asterisks represent significant differences between treatments (P < 0.05). (A) Average roughness of SS electrodes with standard deviation and (B) 3D Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) images of SS electrodes obtained over an area of 35 µm × 35 µm.
Figure 4Cluster and relative abundance family-level taxonomic analysis of the bacterial communities associated with each treatment.
Relative abundance (%) of most-abundant genre identified by amplicon analysis (AA) in each sample (+100 mV, −150 mV, +310 mV vs. Ag/AgCl and Control).
| Family | Genus | Relative Abundance (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA | |||||
| +100 mV | −150 mV | +310 mV | Control | ||
| Rhodobacteraceae | Roseobacter | 4.3 | 3.9 | 34.0 | 6.4 |
| Phaeobacter | 6.0 | 4.8 | 18.8 | 5.9 | |
| Sulfitobacter | 7.2 | 7.9 | 15.2 | 3.5 | |
| Ruegeria | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.2 | |
| Labrenzia | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | |
| Vibrionaceae | Vibrio | 4.0 | 3.3 | 3.8 | 5.0 |
| Photobacterium | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Aliivibrio | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Hyphomonadaceae | Hyphomonas | 4.3 | 3.4 | 3.6 | 5.1 |
| Maricaulis | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.8 | |
| Flavobacteriaceae | Muricauda | 5.3 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 3.7 |
| Maribacter | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Cellulophaga | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Alteromonadaceae | Alteromonas | 0.6 | 0.1 | 2.5 | 11.5 |
| Glaciecola | 7.3 | 5.9 | 0.0 | 0.6 | |
| Marinobacter | 2.9 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | |
| Phycisphaeraceae | Plantomycete | 10.3 | 4.2 | 2.2 | 6.6 |
| Oceanospirillaceae | Neptuniibacter | 3.7 | 4.3 | 3.3 | 6.5 |
| Amphritea | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Oleibacter | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 1.1 | |
| Piscirickettsiaceae | Methylophaga | 5.1 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 6.9 |
| Cellvibrionaceae | Aestuariicella | 2.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 4.5 |
| Saprospiraceae | Lewinella | 5.5 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 1.7 |
| Bacteroidaceae | Bacteroides | 1.1 | 4.6 | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| Colwelliaceae | Colwellia | 0.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.7 |
| Spongiibacteraceae | Spongiibacter | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.6 |
Similarity analysis between sequences obtained by fragment analysis (FA) and amplicon analysis (AA), and their metabolisms and the environments wherein have been reported. The similarity between sequences obtained by AA and FA is expressed as % similarity.
| Family | Most Abundant Genus Identified by AA | % Similarity | Most Abundant Genus Identified by FA | Metabolism and Environments Wherein They Have Been Reported |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rhodobacteraceae |
| 90 |
| 1. Aerobic anoxygenic photosynthesis [ |
| 2. Identified as primary colonizers on surfaces exposed to seawater [ | ||||
| 3. Reported as EAB with high efficiency in the catalysis of the oxygen reduction reaction [ | ||||
|
| 93 |
| 1. Reported in polarized stainless steel cathode [ | |
| 2. Association with | ||||
| 3. Aerobic anoxygenic photosynthesis [ | ||||
|
| 80 |
| 1. Reported on the bacterial communities associated with the early stages of marine corrosion of carbon steel [ | |
| 2. Reported as EAB with high efficiency in the catalysis of the oxygen reduction reaction [ | ||||
| 3. Has been found in both anodic and cathodic biofilms [ | ||||
| Vibrionaceae |
| - | - | 1. Reported in graphite bioanodes present in bioelectrochemical systems [ |
| Hyphomonadaceae |
| 99 |
| 1. Identified in graphite biocathodes present in an MFC [ |
|
| 90 |
| 1. Identified as a typical bacterioplankton in marine ecosystems [ | |
| 2. Reported as the primary colonizer in biofilm developed on stainless steel [ | ||||
| Flavobacteriaceae |
| 87 |
| 1. Reported in a biocathode microbial community [ |
| Alteromonadaceae |
| 85 |
| 1. Reported on electrochemically active biofilms [ |
| 2. Chemo-heterotrophic halophytes [ | ||||
|
| 87 |
| 1. Aerobic chemo-heterotrophic bacteria [ | |
| 2. Reported as predominant bacteria in electroactive biofilms on stainless steel electrodes [ | ||||
| Phycisphaeraceae | Planctomycetes | - | - | 1. Reported in marine phototrophic consortia that can transfer electrons to electrodes in response to reductive stress [ |
| Oceanospirillaceae |
| - | - | 1. Reported in microbial community associated with stainless steel coupons [ |
| Piscirickettsiaceae | Methylophaga | - | - | 1. Reported in stainless steel and carbon steel cathodes [ |
| 2. Has been reported to reduce nitrate to nitrite [ | ||||
| 3. Halophilic methylotrophic metabolism [ | ||||
| Cellvibrionaceae | Aestuariicella | - | - | 1. Aliphatic hydrocarbon-degrading bacterium [ |
| 2. Not yet reported in biofilms associated with stainless steel [ | ||||
| Saprospiraceae | Lewinella | - | - | 1. Isolated from marine sediment [ |
| 2. Not yet reported in biofilms associated with stainless steel [ | ||||
| Bacteroidaceae | Bacteroides | - | - | 1. Reported on stainless steel electrodes [ |
| Colwelliaceae | Colwellia | 89 | Colwellia | 1. Reported on carbon steel cathodes [ |
| 2. Identified in a marine biofilm exposed to high concentration of nitrate [ | ||||
| Spongiibacteraceae | Spongiibacter | 92 | Spongiibacter | 1. Halophilic marine bacterium [ |
| 2. Not yet reported in biofilms associated with stainless steel [ |