2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0169-7722(01)00111-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Biodegradation during contaminant transport in porous media: 3. Apparent condition-dependency of growth-related coefficients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Sodium benzoate was used as the carbon source for biofilm growth and later for the reactive transport experiments (see next sections). Various types of DOC L were used in the literature for experiments on biodegradation processes, including acetate (e.g., Zarnetske et al 2011), glucose and arabinose (e.g., Leu et al 1998;Augspurger and K€ usel 2010;Singer et al 2011), and sodium benzoate (e.g., Çinar and Leslie Grady 2001;Li et al 2001), among other compounds. All of the above compounds are labile and possess typical chemical structures that are often observed in nature; thus, they are all suitable for evaluating the biodegradation of DOC L .…”
Section: Biofilm Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sodium benzoate was used as the carbon source for biofilm growth and later for the reactive transport experiments (see next sections). Various types of DOC L were used in the literature for experiments on biodegradation processes, including acetate (e.g., Zarnetske et al 2011), glucose and arabinose (e.g., Leu et al 1998;Augspurger and K€ usel 2010;Singer et al 2011), and sodium benzoate (e.g., Çinar and Leslie Grady 2001;Li et al 2001), among other compounds. All of the above compounds are labile and possess typical chemical structures that are often observed in nature; thus, they are all suitable for evaluating the biodegradation of DOC L .…”
Section: Biofilm Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, biodegradation generally occurs in the aqueous phase, and predictive models that simulate contaminant degradation and cell growth rate will normally depend on the contaminant concentration [e.g., Li et al, 2001]. Thus predictions of microbial degradation are most likely to be different if nonideal dissolution is considered as compared to the typical assumption of ideal dissolution.…”
Section: Equilibrium-dissolution Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[27] While not investigated for this paper, consideration of nonideal dissolution will also influence predictions of CAH transport and fate downstream of the NAPL-mixture source zone by influencing other transport factors [Dugan and McCray, 2001]. For example, biodegradation generally occurs in the aqueous phase, and predictive models that simulate contaminant degradation and cell growth rate will normally depend on the contaminant concentration [e.g., Li et al, 2001]. Thus predictions of microbial degradation are most likely to be different if nonideal dissolution is considered as compared to the typical assumption of ideal dissolution.…”
Section: Equilibrium-dissolution Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Model calibration can contribute to parameter uncertainty through issues such as parameter cross correlation and nonuniqueness of solutions, and the use of inappropriate models. The influence of model calibration on biokinetic parameter uncertainty has been discussed for batch [ Grady et al , 1996; Liu and Zachara , 2001] and column [ Brusseau et al , 1992; Li et al , 2001] systems. Measurement‐associated uncertainty is likely to be of especially great significance for microbial systems, incorporating the effects of factors such as variability in metabolic status, condition‐specific sensitivity, intrapopulation variability, and community heterogeneity and dynamics, in addition to typical measurement errors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparisons of batch and column results are often evaluated in terms of biokinetic parameters. The few studies that have investigated this issue have produced conflicting results in that similar biokinetic coefficients have been obtained in some cases, but not in others [ Angley et al , 1992; Estrella et al , 1993; Kelly et al , 1996; Langner et al , 1998; Guo and Wagenet , 1999; Guo et al , 1999; Li et al , 2001; Park et al , 2001; Phanikumar et al , 2002; Alshafie and Ghoshal , 2003]. The observed differences between batch and column parameter values have been attributed to several factors, including differences in hydrodynamic conditions, substrate supply, and nutrient availability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%