Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 324

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Environmental regulation of the anaerobic oxidation of methane: a comparison of ANME‐I and ANME‐II communities

Nauhaus, Katja, Treude, Tina, Boetius, Antje, Krüger, Martin·2005·Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Summary: The anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM) is one of the major sinks for methane on earth and is known to be mediated by at least two phylogenetically different groups of anaerobic methanotrophic Archaea (ANME‐I and ANME‐II). We present the first comparative in vitro study of the environmental regulation and physiology of these two methane‐oxidizing communities, which occur naturally enriched in the anoxic Black Sea (ANME‐I) and at Hydrate Ridge (ANME‐II). Both types of methanotrophic communities are associated with sulfate‐reducing‐bacteria (SRB) and oxidize methane anaerobically in a 1:1 ratio to sulfate reduction (SR). They responded sensitively to elevated methane partial pressures with increased substrate turnover. The ANME‐II‐dominated community showed significantly higher cell‐specific AOM rates. Besides sulfate, no other electron acceptor was used for AOM. The processes of AOM and SR could not be uncoupled by feeding the SRB with electron donors such as acetate, formate or molecular hydrogen. AOM was completely inhibited by the addition of bromoethanesulfonate in both communities, indicating the participation of methanogenic enzymes in the process. Temperature influenced the intensity of AOM, with ANME‐II being more adapted to cold temperatures than ANME‐I. The variation of other environmental parameters, such as sulfate concentration, pH and salinity, did not influence the activity of both communities. In conclusion, the ecological niches of methanotrophic Archaea seem to be mainly defined by the availability of methane and sulfate, but it remains open which additional factors lead to the dominance of ANME‐I or ‐II in the environment.

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 · 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2004.00669.x

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.

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

Cited by

See all 324

Metadata

Authors
Nauhaus, K., Treude, T., Boetius, A., & Krüger, M.
Venue
Environmental Microbiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-11-11
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
98-106
ISSN
  • 1462-2912 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-2920
OpenAlex
W2018180327
Cited by
324
References
0
FWCI
9.34
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Environmental regulation of the anaerobic oxidation of methane: a comparison of ANME‐I and ANME‐II communities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2004.00669.x
The paper
Nauhaus, K., Treude, T., Boetius, A., & Krüger, M. (2005). Environmental regulation of the anaerobic oxidation of methane: a comparison of ANME‐I and ANME‐II communities. Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2004.00669.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.