Next Article in Journal
Electrochemical Behavior of Ocean Polymetallic Nodules and Low-Grade Nickel Sulfide Ore in Acidithiobacillus Ferrooxidans-Coupled Bio-Leaching
Next Article in Special Issue
Anaerobic Bioreduction of Jarosites and Biofilm Formation by a Natural Microbial Consortium
Previous Article in Journal
Biomineralization Forming Process and Bio-inspired Nanomaterials for Biomedical Application: A Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparative Analysis of Attachment to Chalcopyrite of Three Mesophilic Iron and/or Sulfur-Oxidizing Acidophiles
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 9
Issue 2
10.3390/min9020069
minerals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Adhesion to Mineral Surfaces by Cells of Leptospirillum, Acidithiobacillus and Sulfobacillus from Armenian Sulfide Ores

by
Arevik Vardanyan
1,
Narine Vardanyan
1,
Anna Khachatryan
1,
Ruiyong Zhang
2,3,* and
Wolfgang Sand
2,4,5
1
Institute of Microbiology of SPC “Armbiotechnology” of NAS of Armenia, Gyurjyan 14, Yerevan 0056, Armenia
2
Aquatic Biotechnology, Biofilm Centre, University of Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsstraße 5, 45141 Essen, Germany
3
Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), Stilleweg 2, 30655 Hannover, Germany
4
Institute of Bioscience, Environmental Microbiology, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Leipziger Straße 29, 09599 Freiberg, Germany
5
College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Donghua University, Shanghai 201600, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2019, 9(2), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/min9020069
Submission received: 6 December 2018 / Revised: 19 January 2019 / Accepted: 20 January 2019 / Published: 24 January 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Interfacial Interactions between Metal Sulphides and Biomining Microbes: Insight into Biofilms and Omics Advances)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Bioleaching of metal sulfides is an interfacial process where adhesion and subsequent biofilm formation are considered to be crucial for this process. In this study, adhesion and biofilm formation by several acidophiles (Acidithiobacillus, Leptospirillum and Sulfobacillus) isolated from different biotopes with sulfide ores in Armenia were studied. Results showed that: (1) these bacteria adhere to pyrite surfaces to various extents. A correlation between pyrite biooxidation and adhesion of S. thermosulfidooxidans 6, L. ferriphilum CC, L. ferrooxidans ZC on pyrite surfaces is shown. It is supposed that bioleaching of pyrite by S. thermosulfidooxidans 6, L. ferriphilum CC, L. ferrooxidans ZC occurs by means of indirect leaching: by ferric iron of bacterial origin; (2) cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, L. ferrooxidans ZC and St. thermosulfidooxidans 6 form a monolayer biofilm on pyrite surfaces. The coverage of pyrite surfaces varies among these species. The order of the biofilm coverage is: L. ferrooxidans ZC ≥ At. ferrooxidans 61 > St. thermosulfidooxidans 6; (3) the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) analysis indicates that the tested strains produce EPS, if grown either on soluble ferrous iron or solid pyrite. EPS are mainly composed of proteins and carbohydrates. Cells excrete higher amounts of capsular EPS than of colloidal EPS. In addition, cells grown on pyrite produce more EPS than ones grown on ferrous iron.

1. Introduction

Biomining is the term used to describe the technology that uses microbes to achieve metal extraction from minerals or waste materials. Biomining of gold or other precious metals normally involves a pre-treatment process using iron-oxidizing and/or sulfur-oxidizing bacteria or archaea prior to cyanide extraction [1]. This process is known as biooxidation. Compared to the traditional mineral processing technology like ore smelting/toasting, biomining is more attractive regarding to its lower energy costs and also is more environmentally friendly. In addition, due to the autotrophic lifestyle of most bioleaching microbes, bioleaching involves less carbon footprints (CO2 fixation by autotrophs) compared to smelting operations (CO2 emission) [2]. Biomining is an increasingly applied biotechnological procedure for processing of ores in the mining industry (biohydrometallurgy) [3]. This technology converts an insoluble valuable metal sulfide into a soluble form by means of microorganisms [4]. Iron-oxidizing bacteria destroy the lattice of the sulfide minerals to make the gold available for further extraction by cyanidation [1]. Studies have shown that Leptospirillum sp. (mainly Leptospirillum ferriphilum) are the dominating iron-oxidizing bacteria in gold-bearing arsenopyrite (FeAsS) and pyrite (FeS2) in biooxidation reactors functioning at or over 40 °C [5,6,7,8]. A high Fe3+/Fe2+ ratio, elevated temperatures (40 °C), as well as extremely low pH values (pH 1.0) are the most favorable conditions for the growth of the bacteria of the genus Leptospirillum [7,9]. At present, this genus includes: L. ferrooxidans (Group I), L. ferriphilum, “L. rubarum” (Group II), and “L. ferrodiazotrophum” (Group III). Bacteria of the genus Leptospirillum are Gram-negative, acidophilic, motile vibrios, which fix carbon dioxide using the energy of Fe (II) ion oxidation [5,10,11,12,13].
Recently, scientists emphasized the importance of bacteria of the genus Leptospirillum and their mixed cultures with other bacteria for biooxidation and bioleaching processes at temperatures above 40 °C [12,14,15,16].
The bacterial leaching of sulfide minerals is primarily an indirect process involving the reduction of ferric ions (Fe (III)):
MS + 2Fe3+ → M2+ + S0+ 2Fe2+
According to the indirect “contact” mechanism the oxidation of minerals is caused by Fe (III) ions complexed in extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). Thus, adhesion and biofilm formation by iron-oxidizing bacteria is essential for an efficient biooxidation or bioleaching of sulfide minerals [16,17,18,19,20]. The EPS mediate cell attachment to minerals as well as electrochemical reactions taking place at mineral surfaces during bioleaching processes [16,19,21]. However, there are few data concerning the adhesion of leaching bacteria like Leptospirillum spp. on pyrite, as well as evidence for a relation between their adhesion and intensity of iron-oxidizing activities in mineral bioleaching processes [22,23].
Most bacteria and archaea use the biofilm lifestyle in natural and artificial systems. A biofilm is considered to be a dynamic structure of a microbial population enclosed in a matrix [24,25,26]. The biofilm matrix is a complex mixture of EPS comprised of polysaccharides, proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids plus detritus [27]. Filling the intercellular space between cells, the EPS generate the structure of the biofilm matrix. The primary function of the EPS is to mediate the attachment of cells onto a substrate as well as to protect the cells from unfavorable environmental influences [28]. In addition, EPS have the function of aggregation formation and stabilization of biofilms. Depending on the mechanisms required for removal of EPS and their association with the cells, EPS can be subdivided into capsular (tightly bound) EPS and colloidal (loosely bound) EPS [29,30].
Biofilm formation is a prerequisite for efficient bioleaching of minerals [16,21]. Thus, in order to improve bioleaching and better control of biocorrosion the study of EPS structure and function of EPS from bioleaching bacteria is of crucial importance [31].
Despite the environmental and economic importance of these bacterial activities, very little fundamental information concerning chemical and biochemical events at the mineral surface during dissolution due to the presence of bioleaching microorganisms is available. The aim of the work is to study the main biological properties of iron-oxidizing and sulfur-oxidizing bacteria isolated from sulfide ores in Armenia. These include their ability to adhere on pyrite and to form biofilm and EPS during the bioleaching process.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Bacterial Strains and Growth Conditions

The iron-oxidizing strains Leptospirillum ferrooxidans ZC, L. ferriphilum CC, and the iron and sulfur-oxidizing bacteria Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans 61, At. ferrooxidans 13Zn, Sulfobacillus thermosulfidooxidans 6 were isolated from several natural biotopes with sulfide ores in Armenia (Figure S1). The pure cultures of these bacteria were obtained by streak plate method [32]. The bacterial characteristics are shown in Table 1. Iron-oxidizing bacteria were cultivated in Mackintosh medium [33] containing 4.9 g/L ferrous iron at optimal temperature. In case of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 0.02% yeast extract was added. Cells were harvested at 8000 rpm for 10 min at 20 °C, washed once and resuspended in 10 mL Mackintosh medium without ferrous iron for attachment and bioleaching tests.

2.2. Bacterial Adhesion Test

Cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, At. ferrooxidans 13Zn, L. ferrooxidans ZC, L. ferriphilum CC and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 were tested for bacterial adhesion onto the surface of pyrite grains for 0 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 120 min. The number of planktonic cells was determined by direct counting under the microscope by means of a Thoma chamber or by the most probable number (MPN).
For enumeration of iron-oxidizing bacteria, the method of ten-fold serial dilution was used. Dilutions (10−1–10−9) of samples were used for inoculation. Cultures were incubated in Mackintosh medium. After 7–10 days of incubation the growth of bacteria was checked by light microscope (Leica, Wetzlar, Germany). Obtained results of bacterial cells were calculated using McCrady’s table [34].
The number of adhered cells was determined from the difference between the initial titre of bacterial cells and the cells observed in the liquid phase. The adhesion was determined as the percentage of adhered cells versus the initial cell number.

2.3. Bioleaching of Pyrite

For pyrite bioleaching experiments, strains were grown in Mackintosh medium containing Fe2+ as an energy source. In the logarithmic growth phase, the cells were collected by centrifugation at 6000 rpm for 10 min. The collected biomass was washed with acidified Mackintosh medium (pH 1.8) and resuspended in the same medium. Pyrite (~95% FeS2) from the Shamlugh ore deposit in Armenia ground to 43–63 μm was used for leaching experiments. Leaching experiments were carried out in 250 mL conical flasks. 50 mL Mackintosh medium without Fe2+, adjusted to pH 2.0 by H2SO4 and a bacterial suspension with 5 g pyrite grains were added to the flasks. The initial cell number was 1–2 × 108 cells/mL. The bioleaching experiments were carried out at 37 °C with shaking (180 rpm). The intensity of pyrite oxidation was estimated by the quantity of the dissolved Fe3+ and Fe2+ ions in the medium. Sampling was performed over a period of 25–30 days. Fe2+ and Fe3+ ions were determined by complexometric titration by using ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Total iron ions were determined by atomic-absorption spectrophotometry AAS 1N (Carl Zeiss, Jena, Germany) using an air-propane-butane flame.

2.4. Pyrite Coupon Preparation

Pyrite coupons were cut from pyrite cubes from Navajun (Spain) with a diamond saw. These coupons were cleaned and sterilized according to a previous report [35]. Biofilm formation experiments were performed with 5 × 108 cells/mL. Experiments were carried out in 100-mL Erlenmeyer flasks containing 50 mL Mackintosh medium (pH 1.8) at 30, 37 and 45 °C with shaking at 130 rpm.

2.5. Visualization of Attached Cells on Pyrite Coupons

Pyrite slices were rinsed with sterile Mackintosh medium and deionized water. Cells attached to pyrite coupons and their EPS were stained by Syto 9 (Invitrogen) and fluorescently labeled with Con A according to a previous report [36]. Stained samples were dried at room temperature and visualized by epifluorescence microscopy (EFM) (Zeiss, Jena, Germany) combined with atomic force microscopy (AFM) (BioMaterial™ Workstation, JPK Instruments, Berlin, Germany) for the investigation of cell morphology and distribution on the surfaces of pyrite coupons. At least three spots of each sample were documented.

2.6. Image Processing

Digital image analysis and a rough calculation of surface coverage were done by using the Axiovision LE 4.8 software (Zeiss, Jena, Germany) and an extended version of the software ImageJ (v1.52g, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA) [37], respectively. AFM files were processed using JPKSPM_Data_Processing_v5.0.81 (JPK Instruments, Berlin, Germany).

2.7. EPS Extraction

EPS extraction strains were grown in 10 L Mackintosh medium at 30, 37 and 45 °C with shaking at 130 rpm. In the stationary growth phase, cells were harvested by centrifugation for 10 min at 10,000 rpm at 4 °C. The colloidal and capsular EPS were obtained according to a previous report [29].
Extraction of EPS of pyrite-grown cells: Bacterial strains were grown on pyrite in Mackintosh medium. To obtain sessile cells, 10 g of pyrite grains were washed with basal salt solution. Detachment of sessile cells from pyrite grains was performed mechanically by vortexing in 20 mL of basal salt solution at maximum speed for 5 min [38]. Solutions were used for analyses of the EPS composition of the strains. The content of carbohydrates, protein, and uronic acids were determined in 1 mL aliquots.

2.8. Determination of the Chemical Composition of the EPS

Carbohydrates were determined by the Dubois method [39] using glucose as standard and measured at 490 nm. The protein content was determined by the Bradford method using bovine serum albumin (BSA) as standard and measured at 595 nm [40]. The presence of uronic acids was determined by the Blumenkrantz and Asboe-Hansen method [41]. Cell lysis was evaluated by determination of 3-Deoxy-D-manno-oct-2-ulosonic acid (KDO) [42]. The concentration of carbohydrates, protein, and uronic acids were determined in µg per mL of culture medium.

2.9. Statistical Analysis

Experiments were done in triplicate; the results are given in mean values. Standard deviations (SD) generally amount to ≤10% for adhesion, ≤15% for EPS analysis, and ≤6% for surface coverage analysis.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Adhesion of Newly Isolated Strains and Bioleaching of Pyrite

The planktonic cells of L. ferriphilum CC grown on pyrite culture decreased by 1–2 × 108 cells/mL to 1 × 105 cells/mL and to 1 × 104 cells/mL, in 30 and 120 min (respectively) after inoculation. The adhesion was 99% and 100% respectively (Table 2). The initial adhesion of L. ferriphilum CC on pyrite mostly occurred within the first 30 min, whereas for cells of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 and L. ferrooxidans ZC the adhesion reached only 88% and 93% after 120 min (Table 2).
Bioleaching of pyrite from Shamlugh ore (Armenia) was studied with L. ferriphilum CC, Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6, L. ferrooxidans ZC. The concentrations of leached iron over time are shown in Figure 1. The amount of total iron extracted from pyrite by L. ferriphilum CC was higher than that of L. ferrooxidans ZC or Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6.
The results of pyrite bioleaching (Figure 1) together with the data on adhesion of cells seem to indicate that the extracted iron and amount of adhered cells are positively related. This agrees with previous findings [22,32].
It has been shown that up to 80–90% of a certain inoculum can attach to mineral surfaces from solution within 24 h [22,43,44,45]. In addition, the initial attachment strongly depends on the species as well as their pre-cultivation conditions. In general, Leptospirillum spp. show higher attachment to pyrite than iron-oxidizing Acidithiobacillus spp., and among the latter ones, ferrous iron-grown or pyrite-grown cells show higher attachment to pyrite than sulfur-grown cells due to a chemically, considerably different EPS [45]. Nevertheless, some cells always remain in the planktonic state, even though the surface area for attachment is not the limiting factor [46,47]. For example, if cells of At. ferrooxidans ATCC 23270T or At. ferrivorans are incubated with pyrite for 24 h, about 50% of the cells attach under the experimental conditions [48]. In the current studies, L. ferriphilum CC showed a higher level of adhesion and pyrite oxidation than Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 and L. ferrooxidans ZC. The quantity of cell occurred in the following order: L. ferriphilum CC > L. ferrooxidans ZC > At. ferrooxidans 61. Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 showed the lowest adhesion to pyrite.

3.2. Biofilm Formation

The visualization of biofilm formation by cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, L. ferrooxidans ZC and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 on pyrite coupons is presented in Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4, respectively. In general, the three strains form a monolayer biofilm on pyrite. Also, the biofilms are highly heterogeneous, as has been reported for many bioleaching microorganisms [23,49,50]. At. ferrooxidans 61 and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 colonize pyrite mainly in the form of individual cells. In some cases, At. ferrooxidans 61 formed chains of cells with up to 4.5 µm in length. Cells of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 appears as short rods with a size of 0.5–0.8 µm × 1.0–1.7 µm. In case of L. ferrooxidans ZC, individual cells were spiral and large cell clusters with diameters of 25 µm occurred (Figure 3). The formation of aggregates indicates that L. ferrooxidans ZC may possess the ability to produce large amounts of EPS. This is in agreement with the finding that Con A signals from EPS of L. ferrooxidans ZC were considerably denser than the ones from the EPS of cells of At. ferrooxidans 61 or Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6.
Surface colonization by the three strains increased over time as indicated by the coverage (Table 3). Obviously, L. ferrooxidans ZC and At. ferrooxidans 61 are better colonizing pyrite surfaces than Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6. This observation is consistent with previous reports [22,23,51].

3.3. EPS Analysis

As part of the cell membrane of Gram-negative bacteria, KDO can be used as a marker for contamination by membrane compounds due to cell lysis during EPS extraction. The amounts of KDO in the cell pellets after cell lysis with sodium dodecyl sulfate were compared with that in EPS. KDO in the EPS fraction was detected below <5% of that in cell pellets (not shown). A low content of KDO indicates that there was no significant cell lysis causing intracellular materials to be released into the solution during the extraction.
The EPS production of ferrous iron-grown as well as pyrite-grown cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, At. ferrooxidans 13Zn, L. ferrooxidans ZC, L. ferriphilum CC, and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 were studied comparatively. As shown in Table 4 and Table 5, the total EPS (colloidal EPS plus capsular EPS) amounted to 49 µg/L, 34 µg/L, 37 µg/L, 49 µg/L, 28 µg/L for cells grown on ferrous iron, respectively. In regards to the total EPS of cells grown on ferrous iron, the EPS amount decreased in the following order: L. ferriphilum CC ≥ At. ferrooxidans 61 > L. ferrooxidans ZC > At. ferrooxidans 13Zn > Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6. In contrast, pyrite-grown cells produced 2008 µg/L, 1877 µg/L, 2261 µg/L, 4237 µg/L, and 1812 µg/L EPS, respectively. Obviously, cells produce much higher amounts of EPS if grown on pyrite compared to the ones grown on ferrous iron. This is in agreement with previous studies indicating that microorganisms produce increased amounts of EPS if grown on a solid substrate compared to a soluble one [22,45]. In addition, EPS production seems to be positively correlated with surface colonization and biofilm formation (Table 3 and Table 5). If grown on ferrous iron, the bacteria produce higher amounts of colloidal EPS than of capsular EPS, with the exception of cells of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6. In contrast, cells produce higher amounts of capsular EPS than of colloidal EPS, except strain L. ferriphilum CC, if grown on pyrite (Table 4 and Table 5). Data shows that the amount of carbohydrates in the capsular EPS produced by all bacteria grown on ferrous iron is considerably higher than that in the colloidal EPS. However, the colloidal EPS contain more protein in comparison with capsular EPS (Table 4). In case of pyrite as substrate, the amount of protein is generally higher than the value for carbohydrates for both capsular and colloidal EPS. Significant amounts of uronic acids were observed in the EPS produced of cells of L. ferrooxidans ZC grown on ferrous iron, of cells of At. ferooxidans 61 grown on pyrite, and of cells of L. ferriphilum CC grown on both ferrous iron and pyrite (Table 4 and Table 5). If grown on pyrite, uronic acids were detected in the colloidal EPS of cells of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6. In the EPS of the other strains, uronic acids were not observed or below the detection limit. It should be noted that lipids are present in most of the EPS samples but the content could not be quantified due to analytical problems.
It is known that some microorganisms excrete organic compounds to form a conditioning film on solid surfaces. This film is able to modify the solid surface properties and, thus, change the subsequent adhesion and biofilm formation [52,53]. Minerals like pyrite or chalcopyrite are more hydrophobic compared with bacterial surfaces [54,55]. During the bioleaching process, due to an adsorption of (macro) molecules to the mineral surfaces, a conditioning film was formed, changing the surface properties of pyrite [56]. This phenomenon has been shown also for the bioleaching archaea e.g., Sulfolobus metallicus, Acidianus sp., or Ferroplasma acidiphilum [36]. In this context, a substantial amount of EPS excreted into the solution which may have been detected as colloidal EPS, and in this way, may function to form a conditioning film actively modifying the pyrite surface.
The chemical composition of the EPS varies with their substrate consequently, and also the attachment differs as a function of substrate [21]. EPS produced by At. ferrooxidans mainly consist of natural sugars and lipids [22,45]. For cells of L. ferrooxidansT, the total amount of EPS increases and EPS composition changes with the increased concentrations of galactose and ferrous iron. In addition, cells pre-cultured on galactose produce “stickier” EPS than the ones on ferrous iron [57]. Cells of Sb. thermosulfidooxidans excrete a substantial amount of humic acids apart from proteins and carbohydrates [56]. The EPS of other leaching relevant bacteria like Acidiphilum 3.2Sup(5) mainly contain carbohydrates and proteins. However, an improved EPS extraction as well as a reduced degree of cell lysis were obtained by using EDTA in comparison with other methods like NaOH, ion exchange resin, and heating and centrifugation [58]. EPS from a mixed culture dominated by At. caldus and L. ferriphilum grown on a chalcopyrite concentrate contained proteins, lipids, carbohydrates and iron(III)-ions [59]. A study on the EPS composition was done for mixed cultures of mesophiles, moderate thermophiles, and thermophiles growing on various mineral resources such as pyrite, sphalerite, and chalcopyrite in continuously operated bioleaching systems. Seventy percent of the EPS was mainly carbohydrates plus a smaller amount of proteins and trace levels of humic and uronic acids [60]. The characterization of two acidophilic microbial biofilms in the Iron Mountain, California, USA, indicated that EPS constituted of carbohydrates, metals, proteins and minor quantities of DNA and lipids [61]. The majority of research on the nature of the EPS produced by acidophiles like At. ferrooxidans was done in studies involving pyrite, sulfur and ferrous sulfate as substrates. These studies investigated the EPS as a whole and did not distinguish between the capsular and colloidal fractions. We detected that acidophiles excrete a substantial amount of EPS into the solution, even if grown on ferrous iron (Table 4 and Table 5). The reason(s) for this and the function of colloidal EPS need further studies.

4. Conclusions

Several isolates from biotopes of sulfide ores in Armenia show the capability to form biofilms and produce EPS, while grown on either soluble ferrous iron or solid pyrite surfaces. The dissolution of pyrite is correlated with the quantity of adhering/attached cells. A monolayer biofilm developed on pyrite by At. ferrooxidans 61, Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 and L. ferrooxidans ZC. Large cell clusters formed by L. ferrooxidans ZC indicate their ability to produce high amount of EPS on pyrite. Biochemical analyses of EPS of the planktonic and attached cells on pyrite grains show that the main components of EPS are proteins, carbohydrates and uronic acids.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2075-163X/9/2/69/s1, Figure S1: Sampling areas in different biotopes of sulfide ores in Armenia.

Author Contributions

A.V. and R.Z. conceived and designed the experiments; A.V., A.K., and R.Z. performed the experiments; A.V. and N.V. analyzed the data; N.V. and W.S. contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools; A.V. and R.Z. wrote the manuscript. WS corrected the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the MES-BMBF STC Grant 12GE 005 of the Ministry of Education and Science of Armenia and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Dew, D.W.; Lawson, E.N.; Broadhurst, J.L. The biox® process for biooxidation of gold-bearing ores or concentrates. In Biomining; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1997; pp. 45–80. [Google Scholar]
  2. Johnson, D.B. The Evolution, current status, and future prospects of using biotechnologies in the mineral extraction and metal recovery sectors. Minerals 2018, 8, 343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kaksonen, A.H.; Boxall, N.J.; Gumulya, Y.; Khaleque, H.N.; Morris, C.; Bohu, T.; Cheng, K.Y.; Usher, K.M.; Lakaniemi, A.-M. Recent progress in biohydrometallurgy and microbial characterisation. Hydrometallurgy 2018, 180, 7–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Schippers, A.; Hedrich, S.; Vasters, J.; Drobe, M.; Sand, W.; Willscher, S. Biomining: Metal recovery from ores with microorganisms. In Geobiotechnology I: Metal-Related Issues; Schippers, A., Glombitza, F., Sand, W., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–47. [Google Scholar]
  5. Coram, N.J.; Rawlings, D.E. Molecular relationship between two groups of the genus Leptospirillum and the finding that Leptospirillum ferriphilum sp. Nov. Dominates South African commercial biooxidation tanks that operate at 40 °C. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 838–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Lawson, E. The composition of mixed populations of leaching bacteria active in gold and nickel recovery from sulphide ores. In Proceedings of the International Biohydrometallurgy Symposium, IBS97, Sydney, Australia, 4–6 August 1997; Australian Mineral Foundation: Glenside, South Australia, 1997; p. 4. [Google Scholar]
  7. Rawlings, D.; Coram, N.; Gardner, M.; Deane, S. Thiobacillus caldus and Leptospirillum ferrooxidans are widely distributed in continuous flow biooxidation tanks used to treat a variety of metal containing ores and concentrates. In Process Metallurgy; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 1999; Volume 9, pp. 777–786. [Google Scholar]
  8. Schippers, A. Microorganisms involved in bioleaching and nucleic acid-based molecular methods for their identification and quantification. In Microbial Processing of Metal Sulfides; Donati, E., Sand, W., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 3–33. [Google Scholar]
  9. Foucher, S.; Battaglia-Brunet, F.; d’Hugues, P.; Clarens, M.; Godon, J.; Morin, D. Evolution of the bacterial population during the batch bioleaching of a cobaltiferous pyrite in a suspended-solids bubble column and comparison with a mechanically agitated reactor. Hydrometallurgy 2003, 71, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Goltsman, D.S.A.; Denef, V.J.; Singer, S.W.; VerBerkmoes, N.C.; Lefsrud, M.; Mueller, R.S.; Dick, G.J.; Sun, C.L.; Wheeler, K.E.; Zemla, A. Community genomic and proteomic analyses of chemoautotrophic iron-oxidizing “Leptospirillum rubarum” (Group II) and “Leptospirillum ferrodiazotrophum” (Group III) bacteria in acid mine drainage biofilms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 4599–4615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Markosyan, G. A new iron-oxidizing bacterium, Leptospirillum ferrooxidans gen. Et sp. Nov. Biol. Zh. Arm. 1972, 25, 26. [Google Scholar]
  12. Vardanyan, N.; Akopyan, V. Leptospirillum-like bacteria and evaluation of their role in pyrite oxidation. Microbiology 2003, 72, 438–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sand, W.; Rohde, K.; Sobotke, B.; Zenneck, C. Evaluation of Leptospirillum ferrooxidans for leaching. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1992, 58, 85–92. [Google Scholar]
  14. Fu, B.; Zhou, H.; Zhang, R.; Qiu, G. Bioleaching of chalcopyrite by pure and mixed cultures of Acidithiobacillus spp. and Leptospirillum ferriphilum. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2008, 62, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Okibe, N.; Gericke, M.; Hallberg, K.B.; Johnson, D.B. Enumeration and characterization of acidophilic microorganisms isolated from a pilot plant stirred-tank bioleaching operation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 1936–1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Vera, M.; Schippers, A.; Sand, W. Progress in bioleaching: Fundamentals and mechanisms of bacterial metal sulfide oxidation-part A. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2013, 97, 7529–7541. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  17. Sand, W.; Gehrke, T.; Jozsa, P.G.; Schippers, A. (bio)chemistry of bacterial leaching—Direct vs. Indirect bioleaching. Hydrometallurgy 2001, 59, 159–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sand, W.; Gerke, T.; Hallmann, R.; Schippers, A. Sulfur chemistry, biofilm, and the (in)direct attack mechanism—A critical evaluation of bacterial leaching. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1995, 43, 961–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, Q.; Wang, Q.; Zhu, J.; Zhou, S.; Gan, M.; Jiang, H.; Sand, W. Effect of extracellular polymeric substances on surface properties and attachment behavior of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans. Minerals 2016, 6, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, Q.; Sand, W.; Zhang, R. Enhancement of biofilm formation on pyrite by Sulfobacillus thermosulfidooxidans. Minerals 2016, 6, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, R.; Bellenberg, S.; Neu, T.R.; Sand, W.; Vera, M. The biofilm lifestyle of acidophilic metal/sulfur-oxidizing microorganisms. In Biotechnology of Extremophiles: Advances and Challenges; Rampelotto, P.H., Ed.; Springer: Basel, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 177–213. [Google Scholar]
  22. Harneit, K.; Göksel, A.; Kock, D.; Klock, J.-H.; Gehrke, T.; Sand, W. Adhesion to metal sulfide surfaces by cells of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans and Leptospirillum ferrooxidans. Hydrometallurgy 2006, 83, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Li, Q.; Yang, B.; Zhu, J.; Jiang, H.; Li, J.; Zhang, R.; Sand, W. Comparative analysis of attachment to chalcopyrite of three mesophilic iron and/or sulfur-oxidizing acidophiles. Minerals 2018, 8, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Flemming, H.-C.; Neu, T.R.; Wingender, J. The Perfect Slime: Microbial Extracellular Polymeric Substances (EPS); IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  25. Sutherland, I.W. Biofilm exopolysaccharides: A strong and sticky framework. Microbiology 2001, 147, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Van Wolferen, M.; Orell, A.; Albers, S.V. Archaeal biofilm formation. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2018, 16, 699–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Flemming, H.-C.; Wingender, J.; Szewzyk, U.; Steinberg, P.; Rice, S.A.; Kjelleberg, S. Biofilms: An emergent form of bacterial life. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2016, 14, 563–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Flemming, H.C.; Neu, T.R.; Wozniak, D.J. The EPS matrix: The “house of biofilm cells”. J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189, 7945–7947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Castro, L.; Zhang, R.; Muñoz, J.A.; González, F.; Blázquez, M.L.; Sand, W.; Ballester, A. Characterization of exopolymeric substances (EPS) produced by Aeromonas hydrophila under reducing conditions. Biofouling 2014, 30, 501–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Sheng, G.-P.; Yu, H.-Q.; Li, X.-Y. Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) of microbial aggregates in biological wastewater treatment systems: A review. Biotechnol. Adv. 2010, 28, 882–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Sand, W.; Gehrke, T. Extracellular polymeric substances mediate bioleaching/biocorrosion via interfacial processes involving iron(III) ions and acidophilic bacteria. Res. Microbiol. 2006, 157, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Vardanyan, A.; Stepanyan, S.; Vardanyan, N.; Markosyan, L.; Sand, W.; Vera, M.; Zhang, R. Study and assessment of microbial communities in natural and commercial bioleaching systems. Miner. Eng. 2015, 81, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mackintosh, M.E. Nitrogen fixation by Thiobacillus ferrooxidans. Microbiology 1978, 105, 215–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gerhardt, P.; Murray, R.; Costilow, R.; Nester, E.W.; Wood, W.A.; Krieg, N.; Phillips, G.B. Manual of Methods for General Bacteriology; American Society for Microbiology: Washington, DC, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, R.; Bellenberg, S.; Castro, L.; Neu, T.R.; Sand, W.; Vera, M. Colonization and biofilm formation of the extremely acidophilic archaeon Ferroplasma acidiphilum. Hydrometallurgy 2014, 150, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, R.Y.; Neu, T.R.; Bellenberg, S.; Kuhlicke, U.; Sand, W.; Vera, M. Use of lectins to in situ visualize glycoconjugates of extracellular polymeric substances in acidophilic archaeal biofilms. Microb. Biotechnol. 2015, 8, 448–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Abramoff, M.D.; Magalhaes, P.J.; Ram, S.J. Image processing with imagej. Biophotonics Intern. 2004, 11, 36–42. [Google Scholar]
  38. Bellenberg, S.; Florian, B.M.; Vera, M.A.; Rohwerder, T.; Sand, W. Comparative study of planktonic and sessile cells from pure and mixed cultures of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans and Acidiphilium cryptum growing on pyrite. Adv. Mater. Res. 2009, 71–73, 333–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Dubois, M.; Gilles, K.A.; Hamilton, J.K.; Rebers, P.; Smith, F. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 1956, 28, 350–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bradford, M.M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 1976, 72, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Blumenkrantz, N.; Asboe-Hansen, G. New method for quantitative determination of uronic acids. Anal. Biochem. 1973, 54, 484–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Karkhanis, Y.D.; Zeltner, J.Y.; Jackson, J.J.; Carlo, D.J. A new and improved microassay to determine 2-keto-3-deoxyoctonate in lipopolysaccharide of gram-negative bacteria. Anal. Biochem. 1978, 85, 595–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. DiSpirito, A.A.; Dugan, P.R.; Tuovinen, O.H. Sorption of Thiobacillus ferrooxidans to particulate material. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1983, 25, 1163–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Baldensperger, J.; Guarraia, L.; Humphreys, W. Scanning electron microscopy of thiobacilli grown on colloidal sulfur. Arch. Microbiol. 1974, 99, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gehrke, T.; Telegdi, J.; Thierry, D.; Sand, W. Importance of extracellular polymeric substances from Thiobacillus ferrooxidans for bioleaching. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 2743–2747. [Google Scholar]
  46. Sand, W.; Gehrke, T.; Hallmann, R.; Schippers, A. Towards a novel bioleaching mechanism. Miner. Process. Extr. Metall. Rev. 1998, 19, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Liu, J.; Li, Q.; Sand, W.; Zhang, R. Influence of Sulfobacillus thermosulfidooxidans on initial attachment and pyrite leaching by thermoacidophilic archaeon Acidianus sp. DSM 29099. Minerals 2016, 6, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bellenberg, S.; Barthen, R.; Boretska, M.; Zhang, R.; Sand, W.; Vera, M. Manipulation of pyrite colonization and leaching by iron-oxidizing Acidithiobacillus species. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 1435–1449. [Google Scholar]
  49. Noël, N.; Florian, B.; Sand, W. AFM & EFM study on attachment of acidophilic leaching organisms. Hydrometallurgy 2010, 104, 370–375. [Google Scholar]
  50. Florian, B.; Noël, N.; Thyssen, C.; Felschau, I.; Sand, W. Some quantitative data on bacterial attachment to pyrite. Miner. Eng. 2011, 24, 1132–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bellenberg, S.; Buetti-Dinh, A.; Galli, V.; Ilie, O.; Herold, M.; Christel, S.; Boretska, M.; Pivkin, I.V.; Wilmes, P.; Sand, W. Automated microscopic analysis of metal sulfide colonization by acidophilic microorganisms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 84, e01835–e01818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Bakker, D.P.; Busscher, H.J.; van Zanten, J.; de Vries, J.; Klijnstra, J.W.; van der Mei, H.C. Multiple linear regression analysis of bacterial deposition to polyurethane coatings after conditioning film formation in the marine environment. Microbiology 2004, 150, 1779–1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Garg, A.; Jain, A.; Bhosle, N.B. Chemical characterization of a marine conditioning film. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2009, 63, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Diao, M.; Taran, E.; Mahler, S.; Nguyen, T.A.; Nguyen, A.V. Quantifying adhesion of acidophilic bioleaching bacteria to silica and pyrite by atomic force microscopy with a bacterial probe. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2014, 115, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Zhu, J.; Li, Q.; Jiao, W.; Jiang, H.; Sand, W.; Xia, J.; Liu, X.; Qin, W.; Qiu, G.; Hu, Y. Adhesion forces between cells of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans or Leptospirillum ferrooxidans and chalcopyrite. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2012, 94, 95–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Li, Q.; Sand, W. Mechanical and chemical studies on EPS from Sulfobacillus thermosulfidooxidans: From planktonic to biofilm cells. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2017, 153, 34–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Aguirre, P.; Guerrero, K.; Sanchez-Rodriguez, A.; Gentina, J.C.; Schippers, A. Making sticky cells: Effect of galactose and ferrous iron on the attachment of Leptospirillum ferrooxidans to mineral surfaces. Res. Microbiol. 2018, 169, 569–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tapia, J.; Munoz, J.; Gonzalez, F.; Blázquez, M.; Malki, M.; Ballester, A. Extraction of extracellular polymeric substances from the acidophilic bacterium Acidiphilium 3.2 sup (5). Water Sci. Technol. 2009, 59, 1959–1967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zeng, W.; Qiu, G.; Zhou, H.; Liu, X.; Chen, M.; Chao, W.; Zhang, C.; Peng, J. Characterization of extracellular polymeric substances extracted during the bioleaching of chalcopyrite concentrate. Hydrometallurgy 2010, 100, 177–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Govender, Y.; Gericke, M. Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) from bioleaching systems and its application in bioflotation. Miner. Eng. 2011, 24, 1122–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jiao, Y.; Cody, G.D.; Harding, A.K.; Wilmes, P.; Schrenk, M.; Wheeler, K.E.; Banfield, J.F.; Thelen, M.P. Characterization of extracellular polymeric substances from acidophilic microbial biofilms. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 76, 2916–2922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Minerals 09 00069 g001 550
Figure 1. Bioleaching of pyrite (FeS2) measured by the release of iron ions, in assays without bacteria (Control), with L. ferriphilum CC, L. ferrooxidans ZC, and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 (FeS2—5%, pH = 2.0, T = 37 °C, shaking—180 rpm).
Figure 1. Bioleaching of pyrite (FeS2) measured by the release of iron ions, in assays without bacteria (Control), with L. ferriphilum CC, L. ferrooxidans ZC, and Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 (FeS2—5%, pH = 2.0, T = 37 °C, shaking—180 rpm).
Minerals 09 00069 g001
Minerals 09 00069 g002 550
Figure 2. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by cells of At. ferrooxidans 61 on a pyrite coupon after 1 day (A,B), 3 days (C–F) and 7 days (G–I) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (A,B,F,H,I), EFM images (C–E,G). EFM images: (C) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (D) biofilm cells stained with Tetramethylrhodamine (TRITC)-Con A (Red). (E,G) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (F) corresponds to the same area in (C–E) observed by EFM. The framed area in (H) corresponds to the same area in (G) observed by EFM. The framed areas by green lines in (A) and (H) are zoomed in (B) and (I) respectively. Bars in (C–E,G) represent 10 µm. Dashed and solid arrows in (C–F) point at the same bacterium, respectively.
Figure 2. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by cells of At. ferrooxidans 61 on a pyrite coupon after 1 day (A,B), 3 days (C–F) and 7 days (G–I) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (A,B,F,H,I), EFM images (C–E,G). EFM images: (C) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (D) biofilm cells stained with Tetramethylrhodamine (TRITC)-Con A (Red). (E,G) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (F) corresponds to the same area in (C–E) observed by EFM. The framed area in (H) corresponds to the same area in (G) observed by EFM. The framed areas by green lines in (A) and (H) are zoomed in (B) and (I) respectively. Bars in (C–E,G) represent 10 µm. Dashed and solid arrows in (C–F) point at the same bacterium, respectively.
Minerals 09 00069 g002
Minerals 09 00069 g003 550
Figure 3. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by L. ferrooxidans ZC on a pyrite coupon after 3 days (A–E) and 7 days (F) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (D,E), EFM images (A–C,F). EFM images: (A) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (B) biofilm cells stained by TRITC-Con A (Red). (C,F) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (D) corresponds to the same area in (A–C) observed by EFM. The framed area in (D) is zoomed in (E). Typical morphology of spiral is shown in (E). Bars in (A–C,F) represent 10 µm.
Figure 3. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by L. ferrooxidans ZC on a pyrite coupon after 3 days (A–E) and 7 days (F) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (D,E), EFM images (A–C,F). EFM images: (A) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (B) biofilm cells stained by TRITC-Con A (Red). (C,F) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (D) corresponds to the same area in (A–C) observed by EFM. The framed area in (D) is zoomed in (E). Typical morphology of spiral is shown in (E). Bars in (A–C,F) represent 10 µm.
Minerals 09 00069 g003
Minerals 09 00069 g004 550
Figure 4. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 on a pyrite coupon after 3 days (A–D) and 7 days (E–H) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (D,H), EFM images (A–C,E–G). EFM images: (A,E) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (B,F), biofilm cells stained by TRITC-Con A (Red). (C,G) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (D) corresponds to the same area in (A–C) observed by EFM. Bars in (A–C,E–G) represent 10 µm. Solid arrows in (A–D) point at the same bacterium.
Figure 4. Surface colonization and partial biofilm formation by Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 on a pyrite coupon after 3 days (A–D) and 7 days (E–H) of incubation at 30 °C and shaking at 130 rpm in the dark. AFM images (D,H), EFM images (A–C,E–G). EFM images: (A,E) biofilm cells stained by Syto®9 (Green). (B,F), biofilm cells stained by TRITC-Con A (Red). (C,G) combination of Syto®9 and TRITC-Con A. The framed area in (D) corresponds to the same area in (A–C) observed by EFM. Bars in (A–C,E–G) represent 10 µm. Solid arrows in (A–D) point at the same bacterium.
Minerals 09 00069 g004
Table
Table 1. Description of the bioleaching strains *.
Table 1. Description of the bioleaching strains *.
IsolatesOriginal SitesEnergy SubstratesOptimum pHOptimum T (°C)
At. ferrooxidans 61Tandzut (Polymetallic, gold containing) ore acid drainage water, Lori Province, ArmeniaFe2+, S0,
metal sulfides		1.8–2.030
At. ferrooxidans 13Zn An industrial leaching pulp of zinc concentrate, ArmeniaFe2+, S0,
metal sulfides		1.8–2.030–35
L. ferrooxidans ZC An industrial leaching pulp of zinc concentrate, ArmeniaFe2+,
metal sulfides		1.8–2.030–37
L. ferriphilum CC An industrial leaching pulp of copper concentrate, Armenia Fe2+,
metal sulfides		1.8–2.037
Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6Drmbon ore dumps (gold, copper) in Martakert Province (Nagorno-Karabakh), ArmeniaFe2+, S0,
metal sulfides		1.7–1.837–50
* Modified according to Reference [32].
Table
Table 2. Adhesion * of four leaching isolates to pyrite determined by direct counting or most probable number (MPN).
Table 2. Adhesion * of four leaching isolates to pyrite determined by direct counting or most probable number (MPN).
DurationStrains
L. ferrooxidans ZCSb. thermosulfidooxidans 6At. ferrooxidans 61L. ferriphilum CC
0 0000
30 min 50506299
60 min65618399
120 min938893100
* Values given in % of initial inoculum.
Table
Table 3. Pyrite surface coverage by biofilm cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, L. ferrooxidans ZC or Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 determined by ImageJ (v1.52g) *.
Table 3. Pyrite surface coverage by biofilm cells of At. ferrooxidans 61, L. ferrooxidans ZC or Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 6 determined by ImageJ (v1.52g) *.
StrainsSurface Coverage (%)
Day 3Day 7
At. ferrooxidans 615 ± 132 ± 0.5
L. ferrooxidans ZC10 ± 633 ± 1
Sb. thermosulfidooxidans 67 ± 112 ± 2
* For coverage calculation, at least three spots (approximately 100 × 100 µm) from each pyrite coupon were visualized under EFM. Mean values ± standard deviations are given.
Table
Table 4. EPS composition (µg/L) of the bacteria grown on ferrous iron.
Table 4. EPS composition (µg/L) of the bacteria grown on ferrous iron.
EPS CompositionStrains
At. ferrooxidans 61At. ferrooxidans 13ZnL. ferrooxidans ZCL. ferriphilum CCSb. thermosulfidooxidans 6
ColloidalProtein2616152210
Carbohydrates55433
Uronic acidBDLBDL12BDL
CapsularProtein128111511
Carbohydrates65564
Uronic acidBDLBDL11BDL
BDL: below detection limit.
Table
Table 5. EPS composition (µg/L) of bacteria grown on pyrite.
Table 5. EPS composition (µg/L) of bacteria grown on pyrite.
EPS CompositionStrains
At. ferrooxidans 61At. ferrooxidans 13ZnL. ferrooxidans ZCL. ferriphilum CCSb. thermosulfidooxidans 6
ColloidalProtein4685915681023468
Carbohydrates4082864751576181
Uronic acid31BDLBDL7360
CapsularProtein750659772761704
Carbohydrates307341446744399
Uronic acid44BDLBDL60BDL
BDL: below detection limit.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vardanyan, A.; Vardanyan, N.; Khachatryan, A.; Zhang, R.; Sand, W. Adhesion to Mineral Surfaces by Cells of Leptospirillum, Acidithiobacillus and Sulfobacillus from Armenian Sulfide Ores. Minerals 2019, 9, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9020069

AMA Style

Vardanyan A, Vardanyan N, Khachatryan A, Zhang R, Sand W. Adhesion to Mineral Surfaces by Cells of Leptospirillum, Acidithiobacillus and Sulfobacillus from Armenian Sulfide Ores. Minerals. 2019; 9(2):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9020069

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vardanyan, Arevik, Narine Vardanyan, Anna Khachatryan, Ruiyong Zhang, and Wolfgang Sand. 2019. "Adhesion to Mineral Surfaces by Cells of Leptospirillum, Acidithiobacillus and Sulfobacillus from Armenian Sulfide Ores" Minerals 9, no. 2: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/min9020069

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop