Skip to main content
Applied and Environmental Microbiology logoLink to Applied and Environmental Microbiology
. 1997 Jun;63(6):2300–2305. doi: 10.1128/aem.63.6.2300-2305.1997

Sulfur Production by Obligately Chemolithoautotrophic Thiobacillus Species

J M Visser, L A Robertson, H W Van Verseveld, J G Kuenen
PMCID: PMC1389182  PMID: 16535627

Abstract

Transient-state experiments with the obligately autotrophic Thiobacillus sp. strain W5 revealed that sulfide oxidation proceeds in two physiological phases, (i) the sulfate-producing phase and (ii) the sulfur- and sulfate-producing phase, after which sulfide toxicity occurs. Specific sulfur-producing characteristics were independent of the growth rate. Sulfur formation was shown to occur when the maximum oxidative capacity of the culture was approached. In order to be able to oxidize increasing amounts of sulfide, the organism has to convert part of the sulfide to sulfur (HS(sup-)(symbl)S(sup0) + H(sup+) + 2e(sup-)) instead of sulfate (HS(sup-) + 4H(inf2)O(symbl)SO(inf4)(sup2-) + 9 H(sup+) + 8e(sup-)), thereby keeping the electron flux constant. Measurements of the in vivo degree of reduction of the cytochrome pool as a function of increasing sulfide supply suggested a redox-related down-regulation of the sulfur oxidation rate. Comparison of the sulfur-producing properties of Thiobacillus sp. strain W5 and Thiobacillus neapolitanus showed that the former has twice the maximum specific sulfide-oxidizing capacity of the latter (3.6 versus 1.9 (mu)mol/mg of protein/min). Their maximum specific oxygen uptake rates were very similar. Significant mechanistic differences in sulfur production between the high-sulfur-producing Thiobacillus sp. strain W5 and the moderate-sulfur-producing species T. neapolitanus were not observed. The limited sulfide-oxidizing capacity of T. neapolitanus appears to be the reason that it can convert only 50% of the incoming sulfide to elemental sulfur.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (195.1 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Pronk A. F., Boogerd F. C., Stoof C., Oltmann L. F., Stouthamer A. H., van Verseveld H. W. In situ determination of the reduction levels of cytochromes b and c in growing bacteria: a case study with N2-fixing Azorhizobium caulinodans. Anal Biochem. 1993 Oct;214(1):149–155. doi: 10.1006/abio.1993.1470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. TRUEPER H. G., SCHLEGEL H. G. SULPHUR METABOLISM IN THIORHODACEAE. I. QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENTS ON GROWING CELLS OF CHROMATIUM OKENII. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 1964;30:225–238. doi: 10.1007/BF02046728. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Thauer R. K., Jungermann K., Decker K. Energy conservation in chemotrophic anaerobic bacteria. Bacteriol Rev. 1977 Mar;41(1):100–180. doi: 10.1128/br.41.1.100-180.1977. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Verduyn C., Postma E., Scheffers W. A., van Dijken J. P. Physiology of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in anaerobic glucose-limited chemostat cultures. J Gen Microbiol. 1990 Mar;136(3):395–403. doi: 10.1099/00221287-136-3-395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Applied and Environmental Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES