Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pilot-Scale in Situ Bioremedation of Uranium in a Highly Contaminated Aquifer. 2. Reduction of U(VI) and Geochemical Control of U(VI) Bioavailability

Wu, Wei-Min, Carley, Jack, Gentry, Terry, Ginder-Vogel, Matthew A., Fienen, Michael, Mehlhorn, Tonia, Yan, Hui, Caroll, Sue, Pace, Molly N., Nyman, Jennifer, Luo, Jian, Gentile, Margaret E., Fields, Matthew W., Hickey, Robert F., Gu, Baohua, Watson, David, Cirpka, Olaf A., Zhou, Jizhong, Fendorf, Scott, Kitanidis, Peter K., Jardine, Philip M., Criddle, Craig S.·2006·Environmental Science & Technology
DOI 10.1021/es051960u
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In situ microbial reduction of soluble U(VI) to sparingly soluble U(IV) was evaluated at the site of the former S-3 Ponds in Area 3 of the U.S. Department of Energy Natural and Accelerated Bioremediation Research Field Research Center, Oak Ridge, TN. After establishing conditions favorable for bioremediation (Wu, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 3988-3995), intermittent additions of ethanol were initiated within the conditioned inner loop of a nested well recirculation system. These additions initially stimulated denitrification of matrix-entrapped nitrate, but after 2 months, aqueous U levels fell from 5 to approximately 1 microM and sulfate reduction ensued. Continued additions sustained U(VI) reduction over 13 months. X-ray near-edge absorption spectroscopy (XANES) confirmed U(VI) reduction to U(IV) within the inner loop wells, with up to 51%, 35%, and 28% solid-phase U(IV) in sediment samples from the injection well, a monitoring well, and the extraction well, respectively. Microbial analyses confirmed the presence of denitrifying, sulfate-reducing, and iron-reducing bacteria in groundwater and sediments. System pH was generally maintained at less than 6.2 with low bicarbonate level (0.75-1.5 mM) and residual sulfate to suppress methanogenesis and minimize uranium mobilization. The bioavailability of sorbed U(VI) was manipulated by addition of low-level carbonate (< 5 mM) followed by ethanol (1-1.5 mM). Addition of low levels of carbonate increased the concentration of aqueous U, indicating an increased rate of U desorption due to formation of uranyl carbonate complexes. Upon ethanol addition, aqueous U(VI) levels fell, indicating that the rate of microbial reduction exceeded the rate of desorption. Sulfate levels simultaneously decreased, with a corresponding increase in sulfide. When ethanol addition ended but carbonate addition continued, soluble U levels increased, indicating faster desorption than reduction. When bicarbonate addition stopped, aqueous U levels decreased, indicating adsorption to sediments. Changes in the sequence of carbonate and ethanol addition confirmed that carbonate-controlled desorption increased bioavailability of U(VI) for reduction.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es051960u

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Wu, W.-M., Carley, J., Gentry, T., Ginder-Vogel, M. A., Fienen, M., Mehlhorn, T., Yan, H., Caroll, S., Pace, M. N., Nyman, J., Luo, J., Gentile, M. E., Fields, M. W., Hickey, R. F., Gu, B., Watson, D., Cirpka, O. A., Zhou, J., Fendorf, S., Kitanidis, P. K., Jardine, P. M., & Criddle, C. S.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2006-05-13
Volume
40
Issue
12
Pages
3986-3995
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
DOI
10.1021/es051960u
OpenAlex
W1965602485
Cited by
269
References
41
FWCI
15.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.