Hydrogen and Carbon Isotope Fractionation during Aerobic Biodegradation of Benzene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main aim of the study was to evaluate hydrogen and carbon isotope fractionation during biodegradation of benzene as a possible tool to trace the process in contaminated environments. Aerobic biodegradation of benzene by two bacterial isolates, Acinetobacter sp. and Burkholderia sp., was accompanied by significant hydrogen and carbon isotope fractionation with hydrogen isotope enrichment factors of -12.8 +/- 0.7 per thousand and -11.2 +/- 1.8 per thousand, respectively, and average carbon isotope enrichment factors of -1.46 +/- 0.06 per thousand and -3.53 +/- 0.26 per thousand, respectively. Inorganic carbon produced by Acinetobacter sp. was depleted in 13C by 3.6-6.2 per thousand as compared to the initial delta13C of benzene, while the produced biomass was enriched in 13C by 3.8 per thousand. The secondary aim was to determine isotope ratios of benzenes from different manufacturers with regard to the use of isotopes for source differentiation. While two of the four analyzed benzenes had similar delta13C values, each of them had a distinct delta2H-delta13C pair and delta2H values spread over a range of 66.5 per thousand. Thus, combined analyses of hydrogen and carbon isotopes may be a more promising approach to trace sources and/or biodegradation of benzene than measuring carbon isotopes only.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".