↓ Skip to main content

Bioaugmentation potential of free and formulated 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM) degrading Aminobacter sp. MSH1 in soil, sand and water

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, April 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
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Bioaugmentation potential of free and formulated 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM) degrading Aminobacter sp. MSH1 in soil, sand and water
Published in
AMB Express, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13568-016-0204-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nadja Schultz-Jensen, Jens Aamand, Sebastian R. Sørensen

Abstract

Pesticides are used extensively worldwide, which has led to the unwanted contamination of soil and water resources. Former use of the herbicide 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile (dichlobenil) has caused pollution of ground and surface water resources by the stable degradation product 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM) in several parts of Europe, which has resulted in the costly closure of several drinking water wells. One strategy for preventing this in future is bioaugmentation using bacterial degraders. BAM-degrading Aminobacter sp. MSH1 was therefore formulated into dried beads and tests undertaken to establish their potential for use in the remediation of polluted soil, sand and water. The formulation procedure included freeze drying, combined with trehalose addition for cell wall protection, thus ensuring a high amount of viable cells following prolonged storage at room temperature. The beads were round-shaped pellets with a diameter of about 1.25 mm, a dry matter content of approximately 95 % and an average viable cell content of 4.4 × 10(9) cells/g bead. Formulated MSH1 cells led to a similar, and frequently even faster, BAM mineralisation (20-65 % (14)CO2 produced from (14)C-labelled BAM) in batch tests conducted with sand, water and different soil moisture contents compared to adding free cells. Furthermore, the beads were easy to handle and had a shelf life of several months.

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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Unspecified 3 15%
Other 3 15%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 6 30%
Unspecified 3 15%
Engineering 3 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Mathematics 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 20%

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 30 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,371,100
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#445
of 1,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,005
of 298,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#11
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,235 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 298,447 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.