The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microbial communities in acid mine drainage
Open accessAbstract
The dissolution of sulfide minerals such as pyrite (FeS2), arsenopyrite (FeAsS), chalcopyrite (CuFeS2), sphalerite (ZnS), and marcasite (FeS2) yields hot, sulfuric acid-rich solutions that contain high concentrations of toxic metals. In locations where access of oxidants to sulfide mineral surfaces is increased by mining, the resulting acid mine drainage (AMD) may contaminate surrounding ecosystems. Communities of autotrophic and heterotrophic archaea and bacteria catalyze iron and sulfur oxidation, thus may ultimately determine the rate of release of metals and sulfur to the environment. AMD communities contain fewer prokaryotic lineages than many other environments. However, it is notable that at least two archaeal and eight bacterial divisions have representatives able to thrive under the extreme conditions typical of AMD. AMD communities are characterized by a very limited number of distinct species, probably due to the small number of metabolically beneficial reactions available. The metabolisms that underpin these communities include organoheterotrophy and autotrophic iron and sulfur oxidation. Other metabolic activity is based on anaerobic sulfur oxidation and ferric iron reduction. Evidence for physiological synergy in iron, sulfur, and carbon flow in these communities is reviewed. The microbial and geochemical simplicity of these systems makes them ideal targets for quantitative, genomic-based analyses of microbial ecology and evolution and community function.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Acidic mine drainage: the rate-determining step
Singer, P. C., & Stumm, W. (1970) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.167.3921.1121 · Cited by 1,757
Anaerobic Growth of Thiobacillus ferrooxidans
Pronk, J. T., de Bruyn, J. C., Bos, P., & Kuenen, J. G. (1992) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.58.7.2227-2230.1992 · Cited by 190
Cited by
Community structure and metabolism through reconstruction of microbial genomes from the environment
Tyson, G. W., Chapman, J., Hugenholtz, P., Allen, E. E., Ram, R. J., Richardson, P. M., Solovyev, V. V., Rubin, E. M., Rokhsar, D. S., & Banfield, J. F. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02340 · Cited by 2,417
Self-citationMatsen, F. A., Kodner, R. B., & Armbrust, E. V. (2010) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-11-538 · Cited by 1,050
Metabolic dependencies drive species co-occurrence in diverse microbial communities
Zelezniak, A., Andrejev, S., Ponomarova, O., Mende, D. R., Bork, P., & Patil, K. R. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1421834112 · Cited by 930
Geomicrobiological Cycling of Iron
Kappler, A. (2005) · Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry · doi:10.2138/rmg.2005.59.5 · Cited by 441
Review: Direct and Indirect Electrical Stimulation of Microbial Metabolism
Thrash, J. C., & Coates, J. D. (2008) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es702668w · Cited by 375
Metadata
- Authors
- Baker, B. J., & Banfield, J. F.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Ecology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-05
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 139-152
- ISSN
- 0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6941
- OpenAlex
- W2099571549
- Cited by
- 1,119
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 18.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microbial communities in acid mine drainage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0168-6496(03)00028-x
- The paper
- Baker, B. J., & Banfield, J. F. (2003). Microbial communities in acid mine drainage. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-6496(03)00028-x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.