↓ Skip to main content

Microbial community analysis in biocathode microbial fuel cells packed with different materials

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
Title
Microbial community analysis in biocathode microbial fuel cells packed with different materials
Published in
AMB Express, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/2191-0855-2-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanmei Sun, Jincheng Wei, Peng Liang, Xia Huang

Abstract

Biocathode MFCs using microorganisms as catalysts have important advantages in lowering cost and improving sustainability. Electrode materials and microbial synergy determines biocathode MFCs performance. In this study, four materials, granular activated carbon (GAC), granular semicoke (GS), granular graphite (GG) and carbon felt cube (CFC) were used as packed cathodic materials. The microbial composition on each material and its correlation with the electricity generation performance of MFCs were investigated. Results showed that different biocathode materials had an important effect on the type of microbial species in biocathode MFCs. The microbes belonging to Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria were the dominant phyla in the four materials packed biocathode MFCs. Comamonas of Betaproteobacteria might play significant roles in electron transfer process of GAC, GS and CFC packed biocathode MFCs, while in GG packed MFC Acidovorax may be correlated with power generation. The biocathode materials also had influence on the microbial diversity and evenness, but the differences in them were not positively related to the power production.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
India 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 32%
Researcher 15 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 16 21%
Environmental Science 12 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 16%
Chemical Engineering 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 May 2015.
All research outputs
#14,143,704
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#301
of 1,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,439
of 160,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,227 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
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 160,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.