278
P.J. Craig· S.N. Forster· R.O. Jenkins· D.P. Miller· N.Ostah . L.M. Smith· T.-A. Morris
antimonydibromid to trimethylantimony by Pseudomonas fluorescens growing anaerobically in sealed vessels has been reported (Giirleyiik et al. 1997).
Many microorganisms are able to able to reduce arsenic(V) to arsenic(III). This
reduction is the first step in the arsenic biomethylation pathway of microorganisms.
Other bacteria are able to derive energy and grow by reduction of arsenic in the process of anaerobic respiration (Laverman et al. 1995; Ahmann et al. 1994). In the case of
antimony - assuming the Challenger mechanism (Cai et al. 1997) for biomethylation
- the recent direct (Giirleyiik et al. 1997) and indirect (Jenkins 1998b) evidence for
trimethylantimony formation from antimony(V) substrates suggests that certain microorganisms are capable of reducing antimony. There are no reports of microorganisms able to derive energy and grow by reduction of antimony. It is worthy of note,
however, that the reduction potentials for arsenic(V) and antimony(V) are similar and
there appears to be no thermodynamic reason why dissimilatory antimony reduction
could not provide sufficient energy to sustain bacterial growth. There is some evidence
in the literature for microbial bio-oxidation of antimony. The bacterium Stibiobacter
senarmontii has been reported to oxidize antimony trioxide (Lyalikova and Korbutaev
1989), while there is mention (supporting data not provided) of the fungus S. brevicaulis
being able to oxidize antimony(III) to antimony(V) (Andrewes et al.1998). In contrast,
a wide range of microorganisms are known to oxidize arsenic(III) to arsenic(V). It is
evident from the literature that there are many significant differences in the interaction of microorganisms with arsenic and antimony compounds. Many of these apparent differences may be caused by selectivity of cellular uptake, rather than distinct
intracellular processing of these metalloids. There is a need therefore for a comparative study of antimony and arsenic biotransformation capability in systems where
differences in cell uptake selectivity for the various forms of the two metalloids are
avoided, such as in cell-free extracts or in permeabilised cells.
References
Ahmann D, Roberts AL, Krumholz LR, Morel FMM (1994) Microbe grows by reducing arsenic. Nature 371: 750
Andreae MO, Froelich PN (1984) Arsenic antimony and germanium biogeochemistry in the Baltic Sea.
Tellus, Series B - Chemical and Physical Meteorology 36:101-117
Andreae MO, Asmodt! JF, Foster P, Van't Dack L (1981) Determination of antimony(II1), antimony(V)
and methylantimony species in natural waters by atomic absorption spectrometry with hydride
generation. Anal Chern 53:1766-71
Andreae MO, Byrd JT, Froelich PN (1983) Arsenic, antimony, germanium, and tin in the Tejo estuary,
Portugal- Modeling a polluted estuary. Environ Sci TechnoI17:731-737
Andrewes P, Cullen WR, Feldmann J, Koch I, Polishchuk E, Reimer E (1998) The production of methylated organoantimony compounds by Scopulariopsis brevicaulis. Applied Organometallic Chemistry, 12:827-842
Anonymous (1998), Expert group to investigate cot death theories: Toxic gas hypothesis (Chairman:
Lady Limerick), Final Report. Department of Health, London
Barnard K (1947) Title unknown. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leeds (UK), pp 9-29
Benson AA (1988) Antimony metabolites in marine algae. In: Craig P, Glockling F (eds) The biological alkylation of heavy metals. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, p 135
Brinckman FE, Olson GJ, Thayer JS (1985) Biological mediation of marine metal cycles; the case of
methyl iodide. In: Sigleo AC, Hattori A (eds) Marine and estuarine geochemistry. Lewis, Chelsea,
Mich., p 227-238
Cai Y, Jaffe R, Jones R (1997) Ethylmercury in the soils and sediments of the Florida Everglades. Environ
Sci Technol 31:302-305
Carmalt CJ, Norman NC (1997) Arsenic, antimony and bismuth: Some general properties and aspects
of periodicity. In: Norman NC (ed) Chemistry of arsenic antimony and bismuth. Blackie, London
P.J. Craig· S.N. Forster· R.O. Jenkins· D.P. Miller· N.Ostah . L.M. Smith· T.-A. Morris
antimonydibromid to trimethylantimony by Pseudomonas fluorescens growing anaerobically in sealed vessels has been reported (Giirleyiik et al. 1997).
Many microorganisms are able to able to reduce arsenic(V) to arsenic(III). This
reduction is the first step in the arsenic biomethylation pathway of microorganisms.
Other bacteria are able to derive energy and grow by reduction of arsenic in the process of anaerobic respiration (Laverman et al. 1995; Ahmann et al. 1994). In the case of
antimony - assuming the Challenger mechanism (Cai et al. 1997) for biomethylation
- the recent direct (Giirleyiik et al. 1997) and indirect (Jenkins 1998b) evidence for
trimethylantimony formation from antimony(V) substrates suggests that certain microorganisms are capable of reducing antimony. There are no reports of microorganisms able to derive energy and grow by reduction of antimony. It is worthy of note,
however, that the reduction potentials for arsenic(V) and antimony(V) are similar and
there appears to be no thermodynamic reason why dissimilatory antimony reduction
could not provide sufficient energy to sustain bacterial growth. There is some evidence
in the literature for microbial bio-oxidation of antimony. The bacterium Stibiobacter
senarmontii has been reported to oxidize antimony trioxide (Lyalikova and Korbutaev
1989), while there is mention (supporting data not provided) of the fungus S. brevicaulis
being able to oxidize antimony(III) to antimony(V) (Andrewes et al.1998). In contrast,
a wide range of microorganisms are known to oxidize arsenic(III) to arsenic(V). It is
evident from the literature that there are many significant differences in the interaction of microorganisms with arsenic and antimony compounds. Many of these apparent differences may be caused by selectivity of cellular uptake, rather than distinct
intracellular processing of these metalloids. There is a need therefore for a comparative study of antimony and arsenic biotransformation capability in systems where
differences in cell uptake selectivity for the various forms of the two metalloids are
avoided, such as in cell-free extracts or in permeabilised cells.
References
Ahmann D, Roberts AL, Krumholz LR, Morel FMM (1994) Microbe grows by reducing arsenic. Nature 371: 750
Andreae MO, Froelich PN (1984) Arsenic antimony and germanium biogeochemistry in the Baltic Sea.
Tellus, Series B - Chemical and Physical Meteorology 36:101-117
Andreae MO, Asmodt! JF, Foster P, Van't Dack L (1981) Determination of antimony(II1), antimony(V)
and methylantimony species in natural waters by atomic absorption spectrometry with hydride
generation. Anal Chern 53:1766-71
Andreae MO, Byrd JT, Froelich PN (1983) Arsenic, antimony, germanium, and tin in the Tejo estuary,
Portugal- Modeling a polluted estuary. Environ Sci TechnoI17:731-737
Andrewes P, Cullen WR, Feldmann J, Koch I, Polishchuk E, Reimer E (1998) The production of methylated organoantimony compounds by Scopulariopsis brevicaulis. Applied Organometallic Chemistry, 12:827-842
Anonymous (1998), Expert group to investigate cot death theories: Toxic gas hypothesis (Chairman:
Lady Limerick), Final Report. Department of Health, London
Barnard K (1947) Title unknown. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leeds (UK), pp 9-29
Benson AA (1988) Antimony metabolites in marine algae. In: Craig P, Glockling F (eds) The biological alkylation of heavy metals. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, p 135
Brinckman FE, Olson GJ, Thayer JS (1985) Biological mediation of marine metal cycles; the case of
methyl iodide. In: Sigleo AC, Hattori A (eds) Marine and estuarine geochemistry. Lewis, Chelsea,
Mich., p 227-238
Cai Y, Jaffe R, Jones R (1997) Ethylmercury in the soils and sediments of the Florida Everglades. Environ
Sci Technol 31:302-305
Carmalt CJ, Norman NC (1997) Arsenic, antimony and bismuth: Some general properties and aspects
of periodicity. In: Norman NC (ed) Chemistry of arsenic antimony and bismuth. Blackie, London