VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFSC |
Texto Completo: | https://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/4875 https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/246642 |
Resumo: | The use of microorganisms in liquid medium for the biocementation process, favors the continuity of bacterial growth. However, if it takes too long to use, it stops growing rapidly, leading to cell death. This study compared two forms of biomass production, capable of storing microorganisms in a latent state, maintaining viability for later use. Here we described the preparation of biomasses, made with organic materials and bacteria Sporosarcina pasteurii (CCT 0538 ATCC 1185). Animal (poultry manure) and vegetable (vetch - Vicia villosa Roth) biomasses were tested. Both biomasses maintained the viability of the microorganisms, and the vegetable was more efficient, presenting greater bacterial growth after revitalization. For testing, reference specimens were molded (without biomass) and also with each one of them, and after 28 days tested for traction and compression. The tensile strength showed an increase of 41.2% (animal biomass) and 44.7% (plant biomass). In the compressive strength, the increase was 37.8% (animal biomass) and 38.8% (vegetable biomass), compared to the reference mortar (without the addition of a microorganism) |
id |
UFSC_4aed1cb6cf9c7863187bc007aa82afa2 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufsc.br:123456789/246642 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFSC |
repository_id_str |
2373 |
spelling |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTARCOMPARAÇÃO DE BIOMASSA VEGETAL E ANIMAL EM BIOARGAMASSABiocementationBiomineralizationBio-mortarOrganic matterSporosarcina pasteurThe use of microorganisms in liquid medium for the biocementation process, favors the continuity of bacterial growth. However, if it takes too long to use, it stops growing rapidly, leading to cell death. This study compared two forms of biomass production, capable of storing microorganisms in a latent state, maintaining viability for later use. Here we described the preparation of biomasses, made with organic materials and bacteria Sporosarcina pasteurii (CCT 0538 ATCC 1185). Animal (poultry manure) and vegetable (vetch - Vicia villosa Roth) biomasses were tested. Both biomasses maintained the viability of the microorganisms, and the vegetable was more efficient, presenting greater bacterial growth after revitalization. For testing, reference specimens were molded (without biomass) and also with each one of them, and after 28 days tested for traction and compression. The tensile strength showed an increase of 41.2% (animal biomass) and 44.7% (plant biomass). In the compressive strength, the increase was 37.8% (animal biomass) and 38.8% (vegetable biomass), compared to the reference mortar (without the addition of a microorganism)O uso de microrganismos em meio líquido para o processo de biocimentação, favorece a continuidade do crescimento bacteriano. Entretanto se este demora para ser usado, para de crescer rapidamente, levando a morte celular. Este estudo comparou duas formas de produção de uma biomassa, capaz de armazenar os microrganismos em estado de latência mantendo a viabilidade para posterior utilização. Aqui foi descrito o preparo de biomassas, feitas com materiais orgânicos e bactéria Sporosarcina pasteurii (CCT 0538 ATCC 1185). Foram testadas biomassas de origem animal (esterco de aves) e vegetal (ervilhaca - Vicia villosa Roth). Ambas biomassas mantiveram a viabilidade dos microrganismos, sendo que a vegetal foi mais eficiente apresentando maior crescimento bacteriano após a revitalização. Para teste foram moldados corpos de prova referência (sem biomassa) e também com cada uma delas, e depois de 28 dias ensaiados a tração e compressão. A resistência a tração apresentou um aumento de 41,2 % (biomassa animal) e de 44,7 % (biomassa vegetal). Na resistência a compressão o aumento foi de 37,8 % (biomassa animal) e de 38,8 % (biomassa vegetal), comparados a argamassa de referencia (sem adição de microrganismo).UFSC - Federal University of Santa Catarina2021-08-232023-05-29T21:31:04Z2023-05-29T21:31:04Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/487510.29183/2447-3073.MIX2021.v7.n4.31-38https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/246642Mix Sustentável; Vol. 7 No. 4 (2021): Mix Sustentável (edição especial - IX ENSUS); 31-38MIX Sustentável; v. 7 n. 4 (2021): Mix Sustentável (edição especial - IX ENSUS); 31-382447-30732447-0899reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFSCinstname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/4875/3700Copyright (c) 2021 Jupira Almeidainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAlmeida, JupiraThome, AntonioTonial, FabianaDe Martini, Roberto2023-05-29T21:31:04Zoai:repositorio.ufsc.br:123456789/246642Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://150.162.242.35/oai/requestopendoar:23732023-05-29T21:31:04Repositório Institucional da UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR COMPARAÇÃO DE BIOMASSA VEGETAL E ANIMAL EM BIOARGAMASSA |
title |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
spellingShingle |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR Almeida, Jupira Biocementation Biomineralization Bio-mortar Organic matter Sporosarcina pasteur |
title_short |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
title_full |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
title_fullStr |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
title_full_unstemmed |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
title_sort |
VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL BIOMASS COMPARSION IN BIOMORTAR |
author |
Almeida, Jupira |
author_facet |
Almeida, Jupira Thome, Antonio Tonial, Fabiana De Martini, Roberto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Thome, Antonio Tonial, Fabiana De Martini, Roberto |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Almeida, Jupira Thome, Antonio Tonial, Fabiana De Martini, Roberto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Biocementation Biomineralization Bio-mortar Organic matter Sporosarcina pasteur |
topic |
Biocementation Biomineralization Bio-mortar Organic matter Sporosarcina pasteur |
description |
The use of microorganisms in liquid medium for the biocementation process, favors the continuity of bacterial growth. However, if it takes too long to use, it stops growing rapidly, leading to cell death. This study compared two forms of biomass production, capable of storing microorganisms in a latent state, maintaining viability for later use. Here we described the preparation of biomasses, made with organic materials and bacteria Sporosarcina pasteurii (CCT 0538 ATCC 1185). Animal (poultry manure) and vegetable (vetch - Vicia villosa Roth) biomasses were tested. Both biomasses maintained the viability of the microorganisms, and the vegetable was more efficient, presenting greater bacterial growth after revitalization. For testing, reference specimens were molded (without biomass) and also with each one of them, and after 28 days tested for traction and compression. The tensile strength showed an increase of 41.2% (animal biomass) and 44.7% (plant biomass). In the compressive strength, the increase was 37.8% (animal biomass) and 38.8% (vegetable biomass), compared to the reference mortar (without the addition of a microorganism) |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-08-23 2023-05-29T21:31:04Z 2023-05-29T21:31:04Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/4875 10.29183/2447-3073.MIX2021.v7.n4.31-38 https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/246642 |
url |
https://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/4875 https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/246642 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.29183/2447-3073.MIX2021.v7.n4.31-38 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.sites.ufsc.br/index.php/mixsustentavel/article/view/4875/3700 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Jupira Almeida info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Jupira Almeida |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UFSC - Federal University of Santa Catarina |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UFSC - Federal University of Santa Catarina |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Mix Sustentável; Vol. 7 No. 4 (2021): Mix Sustentável (edição especial - IX ENSUS); 31-38 MIX Sustentável; v. 7 n. 4 (2021): Mix Sustentável (edição especial - IX ENSUS); 31-38 2447-3073 2447-0899 reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFSC instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFSC |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFSC |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808652029209346048 |