Pyrite Surface Alteration of Synthetic Single Crystals as Effect of Microbial Activity and Crystallographic Orientation

Article Preview

Abstract:

To enhance our understanding of effects of microbially mediated pyrite dissolution and the influence parameters such as varied metabolism and crystallographic orientation of pyrite surfaces some dissolution experiments were performed. Microbial etching experiments on pyrite surfaces of different orientation, including {111} and {210} were devised. The experiments were performed using two strains of thermophilic Archaea (Sulfolobus metallicus, Metallosphaera sedula). Epifluorescence microscopy observations showed that the strains attach to the mineral surface. Studies with Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) showed cell attachment and etching effects after one week of incubation. Surface alteration produced structures following crystallographic orientation up to several 10 μm in size. For all incubated pyrite samples it became apparent that surface alteration was more pronounced with M. sedula than with S. metallicus.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 20-21)

Pages:

350-353

Citation:

Online since:

July 2007

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2007 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] D. Vaughan and J. Craig: Mineral chemistry of metal sulfides (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1978).

Google Scholar

[2] P. Singer and W. Stumm: Science Vol. 167 (1970), p.1121.

Google Scholar

[3] H. Tributsch and J. Bennett: J. Chem. Tech. Biotech. Vol. 31 (1981), p.627.

Google Scholar

[4] F. Crundwell: Hydrometallurgy Vol. 21 (1988), p.155.

Google Scholar

[5] G. Rossi: FUEL Vol. 72 (1993), p.1581.

Google Scholar

[6] W. Sand, T. Gehrke, P.G. Jozsa and A. Schippers: Hydrometallurgy Vol. 59 (2001), p.159.

Google Scholar

[7] A. Schippers, in: Biogeochemistry of metal sulphide oxidation in mining environments, sediments, and soils, edited by J.P. Amend, K.J. Edwards and T.W. Lyons. T.W., Sulfur biogeochemistry - Past and present, p.49, Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Special Paper (2004).

DOI: 10.1130/0-8137-2379-5.49

Google Scholar

[8] L. Keller, L.E. Murr: Biotechnol. Bioeng. Vol. 24 (1982), p.83.

Google Scholar

[9] C. Moses, D. Nordstrom, J. Herman and A. Mills: Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta Vol. 51 (1987), p.1561.

Google Scholar

[10] G. Luther III: Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta Vol. 51 (1987), p.3193.

Google Scholar

[11] G. Luther III, in: Aquatic Chemical Kinetics, edited by W. Stumm, The frontier-molecularorbital theory approach in goetechnical processes, p.173, John Wiley & Sons, New York (1990).

Google Scholar

[12] H. Tributsch: Hydrometallurgy Vol. 59 (2001), p.177.

Google Scholar

[13] P. Norris and D. Barr, in: Bacterial oxidation of pyrite in high temperature reactors, edited by P.R. Norris and D.P. Kelly, Biohydrometallurgy: Proceedings of ISB, p.532, Science and Tech. Letters, Kew Surrey, England (1988).

Google Scholar

[14] L. Larsson, G. Olsson, O. Holst and H. Karlsson: Biotechnol. Letters Vol. 15 (1993), p.99.

Google Scholar

[15] M.B. Allen: Arch. Microbiol., Vol 32 (1959), p.270.

Google Scholar

[16] T.D. Brock, K.M. Brock, R.T. Belly and R.L. Weiss: Arch. Microbiol. Vol. 84 (1972), p.56.

Google Scholar

[17] H. Huber, G. Huber, K.O. Stetter: System. Appl. Microbiol. Vol. 6 (1985), p.105.

Google Scholar

[18] K. Edwards, B. Goebel, T. Rodgers, M. Schrenk, T. Gihring, M. Cardona, B. Hu, M. McGuire, R. Hamers, N. Pace and J. Banlield: Geomicrobiol. J. Vol. 16 (1999), p.155.

Google Scholar