↓ Skip to main content

Phototrophic sulfide oxidation: environmental insights and a method for kinetic analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Phototrophic sulfide oxidation: environmental insights and a method for kinetic analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00382
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas E. Hanson, George W. Luther, Alyssa J. Findlay, Daniel J. MacDonald, Daniel Hess

Abstract

Previously, we presented data that indicated microbial sulfide oxidation would out-compete strictly chemical, abiotic sulfide oxidation reactions under nearly all conditions relevant to extant ecosystems (Luther et al., 2011). In particular, we showed how anaerobic microbial sulfide oxidation rates were several orders of magnitude higher than even metal catalyzed aerobic sulfide oxidation processes. The fact that biotic anaerobic sulfide oxidation is kinetically superior to abiotic reactions implies that nearly all anaerobic and sulfidic environments should host microbial populations that oxidize sulfide at appreciable rates. This was likely an important biogeochemical process during long stretches of euxinia in the oceans suggested by the geologic record. In particular, phototrophic sulfide oxidation allows the utilization of carbon dioxide as the electron acceptor suggesting that this process should be particularly widespread rather than relying on the presence of other chemical oxidants. Using the Chesapeake Bay as an example, we argue that phototrophic sulfide oxidation may be more important in many environments than is currently appreciated. Finally, we present methodological considerations to assist other groups that wish to study this process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Japan 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Unknown 74 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 32%
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Master 11 14%
Professor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 18 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 22%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 10 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Chemistry 6 8%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 11 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,651,503
of 23,106,390 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#19,685
of 25,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,007
of 282,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#236
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,106,390 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 407 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.