Bacterial roles, genomic features, and their regulation in the cleaner recovery of low-grade chalcopyrite bioleaching: A critical review and future prospects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluidized bioleaching is an efficient, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective mining method that has been widely explored and utilized for recovering low-grade copper sulfide minerals, such as chalcopyrite. However, the proliferation and apoptosis of dominant leaching bacteria, such as Acidthiobacillus ferrooxidans , within complex pore, void, and fracture structures in deep-earth environments commonly results in a dynamic bacterial community that evolves continuously. This unclear genetic-scale microbial succession often leads to low leaching reaction efficiency, undesirable reaction passivation, and poor bioleaching operations. This review integrates genetic-scale insights with industrial challenges in chalcopyrite bioleaching, proposing novel strategies for regulating microbial communities. A systematic analysis of five critical dimensions is conducted, focusing on: 1) The adaptations of Acidithiobacillus spp. to high Ag + stress. 2) The direct, indirect, and cooperative bioleaching pathways are linked to bacterial extracellular polymer substance (EPS) and Fe/S oxidation genes. 3) The passivation dynamics governed by bacterial genomics, including thiosulfate, polysulfide, and biofilm mechanisms. 4) The microbial succession patterns under genetic control Hi-C sequencing-guided consortia design. 5) Molecular detection methods (16S rDNA, Hi-C) for optimizing leaching efficiency. The following innovations have been identified as being of key significance: A genomic-environmental interaction model has been developed to bridge the gap between bacterial genetics and passivation dynamics. A comprehensive analysis of Ag + catalysis has been conducted, resulting in a 40% reduction in jarosite formation through jar gene suppression. Practical strategies, such as thermophilic consortia engineering, have been validated in pilot trials, achieving a 32% increase in copper recovery. Additionally, this study meticulously reviews and summarizes typical potential stimulations and enhanced bioleaching methods. The genetic sequencing methods, such as 16S rDNA and Hi-C, have been shown to hold promising potential for improving bioleaching reactions and delaying the formation of passivation substances like jarosite.
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".