Growth Kinetics of<i>Hyphomicrobium</i>and<i>Thiobacillus</i>spp. in Mixed Cultures Degrading Dimethyl Sulfide and Methanol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth kinetics of Hyphomicrobium spp. and Thiobacillus spp. on dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and methanol (in the case of Hyphomicrobium spp.) in an enrichment culture created from a biofilter cotreating DMS and methanol were studied. Specific growth rates of 0.099 h(-1) and 0.11 h(-1) were determined for Hyphomicrobium spp. and Thiobacillus spp., respectively, growing on DMS at pH 7. These specific growth rates are double the highest maximum specific growth rate for bacterial growth on DMS reported to date in the literature. When the pH of the medium was decreased from pH 7 to pH 5, the specific growth rate of Hyphomicrobium spp. decreased by 85%, with a near 100-fold decline in the yield of Hyphomicrobium 16S rRNA gene copies in the mixed culture. Through the same pH shift, the specific growth rate and 16S rRNA gene yield of Thiobacillus spp. remained similar. When methanol was used as a substrate, the specific growth rate of Hyphomicrobium spp. declined much less over the same pH range (up to 30%) while the yield of 16S rRNA gene copies declined by only 50%. Switching from an NH(4)(+)-N-based source to a NO(3)(-)-N-based source resulted in the same trends for the specific growth rate of these microorganisms with respect to pH. This suggests that pH has far more impact on the growth kinetics of these microorganisms than the nitrogen source. The results of these mixed-culture batch experiments indicate that the increased DMS removal rates observed in previous studies of biofilters cotreating DMS and methanol are due to the proliferation of DMS-degrading Hyphomicrobium spp. on methanol at pH levels not conducive to high growth rates on DMS alone.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".