Cited by 258Arsenic contamination and mitigationMine drainage and remediation techniquesChromium effects and bioremediation

Contrasting effects of dissimilatory iron­(III) and arsenic­(V) reduction on arsenic retention and transport

Kocar, Benjamin D., Herbel, Mitchell J., Tufano, Katherine J., Fendorf, Scott·2006·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Reduction of arsenate As(V) and As-bearing Fe (hydr)- oxides have been proposed as dominant pathways of As release within soils and aquifers. Here we examine As elution from columns loaded with ferrihydrite-coated sand presorbed with As(V) or As(III) at circumneutral pH upon Fe and/or As reduction; biotic stimulated reduction is then compared to abiotic elution. Columns were inoculated with Shewanella putrefaciens strain CN-32 or Sulfurospirillum barnesii strain SES-3, organisms capable of As (V) and Fe (III) reduction, or Bacillus benzoevorans strain HT-1, an organism capable of As(V) but not Fe(III) reduction. On the basis of equal surface coverages, As(III) elution from abiotic columns exceeded As(V) elution by a factor of 2; thus, As(III) is more readily released from ferrihydrite under the imposed reaction conditions. Biologically mediated Asreduction induced by B. benzoevorans enhances the release of total As relative to As (V) under abiotic conditions. However, under Fe reducing conditions invoked by either S. barnesii or S. putrefaciens, approximately three times more As (V or III) was retained within column solids relative to the abiotic experiments, despite appreciable decreases in surface area due to biotransformation of solid phases. Enhanced As sequestration upon ferrihydrite reduction is consistent with adsorption or incorporation of As into biotransformed solids. Our observations indicate that As retention and release from Fe (hydr)oxide(s) is controlled by com…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es061540k

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kocar, B. D., Herbel, M. J., Tufano, K. J., & Fendorf, S.
Affiliations
  • U.S. Salinity Laboratory (US)
  • Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, and USDA-ARS-USSL, George E. Brown, Jr., Salinity Laboratory, 450 West Big Springs Road, Riverside, California 92507
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2006-10-05
Volume
40
Issue
21
Pages
6715-6721
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2045712334
Cited by
258
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
FWCI
11.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Arsenic contamination and mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Mine drainage and remediation techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Chromium effects and bioremediation
Keywords
arsenate reduction, arsenite reduction, dissimilatory iron reduction, arsenic retention, arsenic transport, ferrihydrite, biotransformation, Shewanella putrefaciens, Bacillus benzoevorans, arsenic sequestration, reductive dissolution, iron oxyhydroxide, column experiments, groundwater contamination
MeSH terms
Adsorption, Arsenic, Bacillus, Biodegradation, Environmental, Environment, Ferric Compounds, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Iron, Models, Theoretical, Solubility, Time Factors, Shewanella

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