↓ Skip to main content

Recovery of platinum(0) through the reduction of platinum ions by hydrogenase-displaying yeast

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Recovery of platinum(0) through the reduction of platinum ions by hydrogenase-displaying yeast
Published in
AMB Express, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13568-016-0262-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rio Ito, Kouichi Kuroda, Haruka Hashimoto, Mitsuyoshi Ueda

Abstract

Biological technologies for recycling rare metals, which are essential for high-tech products, have attracted much attention because they could prove to be more environmentally friendly and energy-saving than other methods. We have developed biological recycling technologies by cell surface engineering for the selective recovery of toxic heavy metal ions and rare metal ions from aqueous wastes. In this study, we aimed to construct a unique biological technique to recover rare metals 'in solid' form by reducing rare metal ions, leading to a practical next-generation recovery system. Sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) can reduce Pt(II) to Pt(0), and hydrogenases of SRB contribute to the reduction. Therefore, we constructed yeasts displaying their hydrogenases on the 'cell membrane', and reduction experiments were performed under anaerobic conditions without any electron donors. As a result, hydrogenase-displaying yeasts produced black precipitates in PtCl4(2-) solution. Based on X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) observations, the constructed yeasts were found to successfully produce the precipitates of Pt(0) through the reduction of Pt(II). Interestingly, the precipitates of Pt(0) were formed as nanoparticles, suitable for industrial usage.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 42%
Researcher 3 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 16%
Engineering 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%

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 05 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,532,390
of 8,477,503 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#230
of 518 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,312
of 253,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#23
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,477,503 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 518 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 253,457 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.