Microbial Degradation of Citric Acid in Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal: Impact on Biomineralization Reactions.
alkaline
anaerobic biodegradation
biodegradation
bioreduction
citric acid
complexing agent
high pH
low level radioactive waste
Journal
Frontiers in microbiology
ISSN: 1664-302X
Titre abrégé: Front Microbiol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101548977
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
20
11
2020
accepted:
10
03
2021
entrez:
17
5
2021
pubmed:
18
5
2021
medline:
18
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Organic complexants are present in some radioactive wastes and can challenge waste disposal as they may enhance subsurface mobility of radionuclides and contaminant species via chelation. The principal sources of organic complexing agents in low level radioactive wastes (LLW) originate from chemical decontamination activities. Polycarboxylic organic decontaminants such as citric and oxalic acid are of interest as currently there is a paucity of data on their biodegradation at high pH and under disposal conditions. This work explores the biogeochemical fate of citric acid, a model decontaminant, under high pH anaerobic conditions relevant to disposal of LLW in cementitious disposal environments. Anaerobic microcosm experiments were set up, using a high pH adapted microbial inoculum from a well characterized environmental site, to explore biodegradation of citrate under representative repository conditions. Experiments were initiated at three different pH values (10, 11, and 12) and citrate was supplied as the electron donor and carbon source, under fermentative, nitrate-, Fe(III)- and sulfate- reducing conditions. Results showed that citrate was oxidized using nitrate or Fe(III) as the electron acceptor at > pH 11. Citrate was fully degraded and removed from solution in the nitrate reducing system at pH 10 and pH 11. Here, the microcosm pH decreased as protons were generated during citrate oxidation. In the Fe(III)-reducing systems, the citrate removal rate was slower than in the nitrate reducing systems. This was presumably as Fe(III)-reduction consumes fewer moles of citrate than nitrate reduction for the same molar concentrations of electron acceptor. The pH did not change significantly in the Fe(III)-reducing systems. Sulfate reduction only occurred in a single microcosm at pH 10. Here, citrate was fully removed from solution, alongside ingrowth of acetate and formate, likely fermentation products. The acetate and lactate were subsequently used as electron donors during sulfate-reduction and there was an associated decrease in solution pH. Interestingly, in the Fe(III) reducing experiments, Fe(II) ingrowth was observed at pH values recorded up to 11.7. Here, TEM analysis of the resultant solid Fe-phase indicated that nanocrystalline magnetite formed as an end product of Fe(III)-reduction under these extreme conditions. PCR-based high-throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing revealed that bacteria capable of nitrate Fe(III) and sulfate reduction became enriched in the relevant, biologically active systems. In addition, some fermentative organisms were identified in the Fe(III)- and sulfate-reducing systems. The microbial communities present were consistent with expectations based on the geochemical data. These results are important to improve long-term environmental safety case development for cementitious LLW waste disposal.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33995289
doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.565855
pmc: PMC8114274
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
565855Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Byrd, Lloyd, Small, Taylor, Bagshaw, Boothman and Morris.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that this study received funding from Low Level Waste Repository Ltd. The funder had the following involvement with the study: support and contextualization for experimental design, manuscript review. The funder was not involved in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, or, the decision to submit it for publication. FT was employed by company Low Level Waste Repository Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 Sep;70(9):5595-602
pubmed: 15345448
Sci Rep. 2018 Jun 8;8(1):8753
pubmed: 29884890
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Mar 15;108 Suppl 1:4516-22
pubmed: 20534432
ISME J. 2015 Feb;9(2):310-20
pubmed: 25062127
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Oct;4(10):752-64
pubmed: 16980937
FEMS Microbiol Rev. 1997 Jul;20(3-4):557-71
pubmed: 9340003
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1991 Dec;57(12):3535-40
pubmed: 16348602
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Sep;79(17):5112-20
pubmed: 23793624
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2017 Mar 27;56(14):4042-4046
pubmed: 28252244
Environ Sci Technol. 2004 Apr 1;38(7):2067-74
pubmed: 15112808
J R Soc Interface. 2015 Jun 6;12(107):
pubmed: 25972437
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 14;10(9):e0137682
pubmed: 26367005
Mikrobiologiia. 2005 Sep-Oct;74(5):642-53
pubmed: 16315983
Arch Microbiol. 1998 Dec;171(1):19-30
pubmed: 9871015
Nat Commun. 2014 May 21;5:3900
pubmed: 24845058
Extremophiles. 2010 Jan;14(1):41-6
pubmed: 19779762
Chem Rev. 2009 Oct;109(10):4580-95
pubmed: 19772347
Mikrobiologiia. 2006 Nov-Dec;75(6):775-85
pubmed: 17205802
Trends Microbiol. 2011 Jul;19(7):330-40
pubmed: 21664821
ISME J. 2012 Aug;6(8):1621-4
pubmed: 22402401
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2007 Apr;57(Pt 4):675-681
pubmed: 17392185
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007 Dec;77(4):927-34
pubmed: 17943280
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002 May;68(5):2294-9
pubmed: 11976100
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014 Jan;80(1):128-37
pubmed: 24141133
Extremophiles. 2007 Jan;11(1):33-9
pubmed: 16932842
Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2000 Jun;11(3):271-9
pubmed: 10851150
FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2003 Jun;27(2-3):427-47
pubmed: 12829278
J Hazard Mater. 2011 Oct 30;194:15-23
pubmed: 21871726
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2018 Jan;68(1):99-105
pubmed: 29116035
Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2010 Oct;45(5):453-62
pubmed: 20735204
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1993 Jan;59(1):109-13
pubmed: 16348836
Mikrobiologiia. 2007 Nov-Dec;76(6):834-43
pubmed: 18297876
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013 Jun;79(11):3320-6
pubmed: 23524677
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1984 Jul;48(1):81-7
pubmed: 6433795
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009 Jul;83(5):957-63
pubmed: 19399495
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2014 Oct;64(Pt 10):3478-3484
pubmed: 25052394
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2019 Dec;69(12):3666-3671
pubmed: 29580368
Biodegradation. 2009 Jul;20(4):499-510
pubmed: 19089588
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1992 Mar;58(3):850-6
pubmed: 1575486
Front Microbiol. 2018 Aug 23;9:1985
pubmed: 30190715
Environ Microbiol Rep. 2019 Aug;11(4):558-570
pubmed: 30985964
Environ Sci Technol. 2014 Nov 18;48(22):13549-56
pubmed: 25231875
Environ Sci Technol. 2005 Jun 1;39(11):4109-16
pubmed: 15984789
BMC Genomics. 2009 Sep 22;10:447
pubmed: 19772637
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 06;10(3):e0119164
pubmed: 25748643
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2013 Jun;63(Pt 6):1960-1966
pubmed: 23041639
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1987 Jul;53(7):1536-40
pubmed: 16347384
Extremophiles. 2007 Mar;11(2):363-70
pubmed: 17242870
FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2015 Aug;91(8):fiv085
pubmed: 26195600
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2007 Jul;57(Pt 7):1619-1624
pubmed: 17625205