Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJNA1160820 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Dataset's files
| Action | DRS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRR30684100_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR30684100_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR30684101_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR30684101_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR30684102_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz |
Items per page: 5 1 - 5 of 132 |
Similar Datasets
Project description:in situ v. ex situ biogas upgrading
| PRJEB26863 | ENA
Project description:Bioavailability of electron acceptors is probably the most limiting factor in the restoration of anoxic, contaminated environments. The oxidation of contaminants such as aromatic hydrocarbons, particularly in aquifers, often depends on the reduction of ferric iron or sulphate. We have previously detected a highly active fringe zone beneath a toluene plume at a tar-oil contaminated aquifer in Germany, where a specialized community of contaminant degraders co-dominated by Desulfobulbaceae and Geobacteraceae had established. Although on-site geochemistry links degradation to sulphidogenic processes, dominating catabolic (benzylsuccinate synthase alpha-subunit, bssA) genes detected in situ appeared more related to those of Geobacter spp. Therefore, a stable isotope probing (SIP) incubation of sediment samples with 13C7-toluene and comparative electron acceptor amendment was performed. We introduce pyrosequencing of templates from SIP microcosms as a powerful new strategy in SIP gradient interpretation (Pyro-SIP). Our results reveal the central role of Desulfobulbaceae for sulphidogenic toluene degradation in situ, and affiliate the detected bssA genes to this lineage. This, and the absence of 13C-labelled DNA of Geobacter spp. in SIP gradients preclude their relevance as toluene degraders in situ. In contrast, Betaproteobacteria related to Georgfuchsia spp. became labelled under iron-reducing conditions. Furthermore, secondary toluene degraders belonging to the Peptococcaceae detected in both treatments suggest the possibility of functional redundancy amongst anaerobic toluene degraders on site. 2 samples examined from the different electron-acceptors (sulphate or ferric iron) incubates at the time point of maximal toluene degradation.
2011-03-18 | E-GEOD-25449 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation. 38 soil samples from two high arctic locations that were contaminated-treated, contaminated or not contaminated followed for up to 4 years
2010-05-15 | E-GEOD-17517 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation. 38 soil samples from two high arctic locations that were contaminated-treated, contaminated or not contaminated followed for up to 4 years
2010-06-19 | E-GEOD-17532 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:M'thermobacter and ex situ biogas upgrading
| PRJEB26841 | ENA
Project description:Biomethanization of CO2 via ex-situ application
| PRJEB27896 | ENA
Project description:High Arctic soils have low nutrient availability, low moisture content and very low temperatures and, as such, they pose a particular problem in terms of hydrocarbon bioremediation. An in-depth knowledge of the microbiology involved in this process is likely to be crucial to understand and optimize the factors most influencing bioremediation. Here, we compared two distinct large-scale field bioremediation experiments, located at Alert (ex situ approach) and Eureka (in situ approach), in the Canadian high Arctic. Bacterial community structure and function were assessed using microarrays targeting the 16S rRNA genes of bacteria found in cold environments and hydrocarbon degradation genes as well as reverse-transcriptase real-time PCR targeting key functional genes. Results indicated a large difference between sampling sites in terms of both soil microbiology and decontamination rates. A rapid reorganization of the bacterial community structure and functional potential as well as rapid increases in the expression of alkane monooxygenases and polyaromatic hydrocarbon ring-hydroxylating-dioxygenases were observed one month after the bioremediation treatment commenced in the Alert soils. In contrast, no clear changes in community structure were observed in Eureka soils, while key gene expression increased after a relatively long lag period (1 year). Such discrepancies are likely caused by differences in bioremediation treatments (i.e. ex situ vs. in situ), weathering of the hydrocarbons, indigenous microbial communities, and environmental factors such as soil humidity and temperature. In addition, this study demonstrates the value of molecular tools for the monitoring of polar bacteria and their associated functions during bioremediation.
2009-08-07 | GSE17517 | GEO