Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Biological Pump”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

134 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

A Novel Laser 3D Printing Method for the Advanced Manufacturing of Protonic Ceramics

Protonic ceramics (PCs) with high proton conductivity at intermediate temperatures (300–600 °C) have attracted many applications in energy conversion and storage devices such as PC fuel/electrolysis cells, PC membrane reactors, hydrogen pump, hydrogen or water-permeable membranes, and gas sensors. One of the essential steps for fulfilling the practical utilization of these intermediate-temperature PC energy devices is the successful development of advanced manufacturing methods for cost-effectively and rapidly fabricating them with high energy density and efficiency in a customized demand. In this work, we developed a new laser 3D printing (L3DP) technique by integrating digital microextrusion-based 3D printing and precise and rapid laser processing (sintering, drying, cutting, and polishing), which showed the capability of manufacturing PCs with desired complex geometries, crystal structures, and microstructures. The L3DP method allowed the fabrication of PC parts such as pellets, cylinders, cones, films, straight/lobed tubes with sealed endings, microchannel membranes, and half cells for assembling PC energy devices. The preliminary measurement of the L3DP electrolyte film showed a high proton conductivity of ≈7 × 10−3 S/cm. This L3DP technique not only demonstrated the potential to bring the PCs into practical use but also made it possible for the rapid direct digital manufacturing of ceramic-based devices.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

Proton transfer reactions in donor site mutants of ESR, a retinal protein from Exiguobacterium sibiricum

Light-driven proton transport by microbial retinal proteins such as archaeal bacteriorhodopsin involves carboxylic residues as internal proton donors to the catalytic center which is a retinal Schiff base (SB). The proton donor, Asp96 in bacteriorhodopsin, supplies a proton to the transiently deprotonated Schiff base during the photochemical cycle. Subsequent proton uptake resets the protonated state of the donor. Here this two step process became a distinctive signature of retinal based proton pumps. Similar steps are observed also in many natural variants of bacterial proteorhodopsins and xanthorhodopsins where glutamic acid residues serve as a proton donor. Recently, however, an exception to this rule was found. A retinal protein from Exiguobacterium sibiricum, ESR, contains a Lys residue in place of Asp or Glu, which facilitates proton transfer from the bulk to the SB. Lys96 can be functionally replaced with the more common donor residues, Asp or Glu. Proton transfer to the SB in the mutants containing these replacements (K96E and K96D/A47T) is much faster than in the proteins lacking the proton donor (K96A and similar mutants), and in the case of K96D/A47T, comparable with that in the wild type, indicating that carboxylic residues can replace Lys96 as proton donors in ESR. We show here that there are important differences in the functioning of these residues in ESR from the way Asp96 functions in bacteriorhodopsin. Reprotonation of the SB and proton uptake from the bulk occur almost simultaneously during the M to N transition (as in the wild type ESR at neutral pH), whereas in bacteriorhodopsin these two steps are well separated in time and occur during the M to N and N to O transitions, respectively.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Results from a multi-laboratory ocean metaproteomic intercomparison: effects of LC-MS acquisition and data analysis procedures

Metaproteomics is an increasingly popular methodology that provides information regarding the metabolic functions of specific microbial taxa and has potential for contributing to ocean ecology and biogeochemical studies. A blinded multi-laboratory intercomparison was conducted to assess comparability and reproducibility of taxonomic and functional results and their sensitivity to methodological variables. Euphotic zone samples from the Bermuda Atlantic Time-series Study (BATS) in the North Atlantic Ocean collected by in situ pumps and the autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) Clio were distributed with a paired metagenome, and one-dimensional (1D) liquid chromatographic data-dependent acquisition mass spectrometry analysis was stipulated. Analysis of mass spectra from seven laboratories through a common bioinformatic pipeline identified a shared set of 1056 proteins from 1395 shared peptide constituents. Quantitative analyses showed good reproducibility: pairwise regressions of spectral counts between laboratories yielded R 2 values averaged 0.62±0.11, and a Sørensen similarity analysis of the top 1000 proteins revealed 70 %–80 % similarity between laboratory groups. Taxonomic and functional assignments showed good coherence between technical replicates and different laboratories. A bioinformatic intercomparison study, involving 10 laboratories using eight software packages, successfully identified thousands of peptides within the complex metaproteomic datasets, demonstrating the utility of these software tools for ocean metaproteomic research. Lessons learned and potential improvements in methods were described. Future efforts could examine reproducibility in deeper metaproteomes, examine accuracy in targeted absolute quantitation analyses, and develop standards for data output formats to improve data interoperability. Together, these results demonstrate the reproducibility of metaproteomic analyses and their suitability for microbial oceanography research, including integration into global-scale ocean surveys and ocean biogeochemical models.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sitewide Environmental Impact Statement Site 300 and Arroyo Mocho Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Alameda and San Joaquin Counties, California (Mid-Term Report)

At the request of Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS), Nomad Ecology (Nomad) conducted sensitive botanical resource surveys, and vegetation mapping and classification of the 7,000-acre Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Experimental Test Site (Site 300) and 17 acres surrounding the Arroyo Mocho pumping station and the access road to the pumping station (Arroyo Mocho). In addition to surveying for sensitive botanical resources, Nomad also compiled existing rare plant and vegetation data provided by LLNL from past monitoring and environmental impact evaluations. The results of these efforts will provide supporting information for a Site-wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS). These surveys were conducted during the months of April – June, and August 2020. Rare plant surveys were scheduled for February and March 2020; however, February surveys were not initiated because the contract for this work was not finalized, and March surveys were cut short due to the timing of the Covid-19 shelter in place. February and March rare plant surveys are scheduled for 2021; therefore, the rare plant survey results in this report should be considered incomplete until the 2021 surveys are conducted. A total of 10 special status plant species were recorded within Site 300 and Arroyo Mocho. Of these 10, three were not previously recorded within the study areas, and include Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum subsp. interius), Jepson’s woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum jepsonii), and Michael’s rein orchid (Piperia michaelii), which all occur at Arroyo Mocho. Special status plant species known from these two sites total 23 rare plant occurrences (populations), which represent an estimated 50,929 rare plant individuals. This total of all special status plant species breaks down to one occurrence of a federally and/or state listed plant species (98 individuals), six occurrences of California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1 & 2 species (49,010 individuals), and 16 occurrences of CRPR 3 & 4 species (1,821 individuals). A total of 35 vegetation communities were mapped at Site 300, of which 20 are considered Sensitive Natural Communities. A total of nine vegetation communities were mapped at Arroyo Mocho, of which two are considered Sensitive Natural Communities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Pumping Iron: A Multi-omics Analysis of Two Extremophilic Algae Reveals Iron Economy Management

Marine algae are responsible for half of the world's primary productivity, but this critical carbonsink is often constrained by insufficient iron. One species of marine algae, Dunaliella tertiolecta, isremarkable for its ability to maintain photosynthesis and thrive in low-iron environments. A relatedspecies, Dunaliella salina Bardawil, shares this attribute but is an extremophile found in hypersaline environments. To elucidate how algae manage their iron requirements, we produced highquality genome assemblies and transcriptomes for both species to serve as a foundation for acomparative multi-omics analysis. We identified a host of iron-uptake proteins in both species,including a massive expansion of transferrins and a novel family of siderophore-iron uptakeproteins. Complementing these multiple iron-uptake routes, ferredoxin functions as a large ironreservoir that can be released by induction of flavodoxin. Proteomic analysis revealed reducedinvestment in the photosynthetic apparatus coupled with remodeling of antenna proteins bydramatic iron-deficiency induction of TIDI1, a light harvesting complex protein found also in otherchlorophytes. These combinatorial iron scavenging and sparing strategies make Dunaliellaunique among photosynthetic organisms

iron homeostasis, phytoplankton, Iron starvation i↗
DOE OSTI2020

Reveal of Uranium Bioremediation Mechanisms by Bacillus Species through Proteomics Studies

Radionuclides, such as Uranium (U) and heavy metals continue to pose threats to the ecosystem health and processes at the Department of Energy (DOE) managed, Savannah River Site (SRS), located along the Savannah River near Aiken, SC. Such co-contaminated environments are difficult to remediate using conventional excavation and disposal or pump-and-treat approaches. Globally, more than 109 tons of uranium contaminated areas pose a long term threat to human and ecological health. Even with presented low concentrations in the brain, central nervous effects are still observed. Uranium and depleted uranium (DU) have long term effects on the kidneys. Some small general health effects include severe headaches and breathing problems. Uranus ions are toxic to living cells because they inhibit metabolism of carbohydrates by blocking ATP binding sites. Bioremediation by microorganisms represents an alternative solution, which is advantageous because of the possibility of biosorbent regeneration, cost-effectiveness, increased metal removal and easy recovery of some valuable metals. Bacillus sp. bacterium was previously used in the bioremediation of heavy metals in coal mine run off waters of SRS. However, its ability to bioremediate uranium was unknown so far. Hence, in the present study, uranium bioremediation by Bacillus sp. bacterium was investigated. The mechanism of bioremediation was also revealed through proteomics studies. Heavy metals contamination poses a serious threat to water, soil and human health. Soil and water are contaminated due to excessive exploitation of uranium mines for generation of nuclear energy and weaponry. It is not degradable easily and persist in soil and water for a long period of time due to its long half- life. Savannah river site (SRS) is one of the uranium contaminated sites. The physical or chemical remediation techniques are costly and complex. Microbial system approaches with competent bacteria has received increased attention due to its adaptability in various environmental matrices and cost effectiveness. However, even though there are multiple suggested pathways (F1), the specific mechanisms that drive this behavior are still unclear, especially with popular microorganisms such as Bacillus species. In a previous research (Ibeanusi et al, 2003) Bacillus sp. was shown to detoxify and precipitate a variety of heavy metals in coal pile runoff waters of SRS site. Additionally, genomic analysis demonstrated that this microorganism posses multiple attributes for chemical transport regulation and metabolic pathways. U remediation occurs during the first 20 hours of exposure. During this time period, Bacillus sp. may work primarily under two mechanisms - sorption and accumulation. These two mechanisms simultaneously work to protect the microorganism from high concentrations. Figure 10 demonstrates that certain proteins are up regulated and down regulated under extreme stressful conditions. Membrane fraction proteins were up regulated. Cytosolic fraction proteins were down regulated. This protein information coincides with the adsorption behavior. Bacillus sp. is a good candidate for U remediation at various concentrations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Meteorological and Soil Data from Ecohydrology Sensor Towers at Pump House and Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado, 2019-2025

This data package includes hourly meteorological and soil sensor data at eight ecohydrology monitoring sites in East River Watershed, Colorado as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) research led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL). Four field sites were located on the hillslope of East River (ER) near Pump House (PH) at Mount Crested Butte (ER-PHS1 to 4), and the other four are in the Snodgrass Mountain (SG) area (SG-EHS5 to 8). In terms of vegetation cover, three sites are in montane grasslands (ER-PHS1, ER-PHS2, and SG-EHS5), three are below evergreen conifer canopy (ER-PHS3, SG-EHS6, and SG-EHS7), and two are below deciduous aspen canopy (ER-PHS4 and SG-EHS8). The monitoring period began in October 2019 at the East River sites, in October 2020 at SG-EHS5 and SG-EHS6, and in October 2021 at SG-EHS7 and SG-EHS8. In September 2024, all four East River sites were fully retired. The four Snodgrass Mountain sites remain active. Each site is equipped with a comprehensive suite of meteorological sensors on a tripod and soil sensors that measure weather, energy fluxes, and soil variables. This data package includes measurements from ten different types of sensors and up to thirteen individual sensors per site, including (1) a weather station (measurement height ranges from 2.8~3.8 meters (m) above ground), (2) a quantum sensor for photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (2.4~3.3m), (3) a net radiometer (1.7~2.1m), (4) an infrared radiometer (1.6~2.2m), (5) a sonic distance sensor (1.5~1.9m), (6) a soil carbon dioxide (CO2) flux chamber (0m), (7) a soil heat flux plate (-0.05m below ground), (8) a soil oxygen sensor (-0.3m), (9) a soil water potential sensor (-0.3m), and (10) soil water content sensors at 3~4 depths (-1.15 ~ -0.1m). A total of twenty-three variables is reported in this data package, including (1) atmospheric variables: air temperature (TA), atmospheric pressure (PA), vapor pressure (VP), and vapor pressure deficit (VPD), (2) precipitation variables: rain precipitation (P) and snow depth (D_SNOW), (3) energy fluxes variables: four-component net radiation (NETRAD) (shortwave/longwave incoming/outgoing radiation, SW_IN, SW_OUT, LW_IN, LW_OUT), photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD), and soil heat flux (G), (4) soil variables: soil water content (SWC), soil water potential (SWP), soil temperature (TS), soil bulk electrical conductivity (COND_SOIL), and soil gaseous oxygen concentration (O2_SOIL), (5) wind variables: two-dimensional wind speed (WS), gust speed (WS_MAX), and wind direction (WD), and (6) surface variables: surface infrared temperature (T_CANOPY) and soil CO2 flux (CO2_SOIL). Please see the Methods section for data processing and QA/QC steps taken to generate the hourly datasets. The following files are included in this data package (notes on version: v{x}-{y}, where x is the metadata version, and y is the data version, when applicable): (1) “metadata_site_v{x}-{y}.csv” - a site metadata file that summarizes location information of all sites, including site ID, description, coordinates, timeframe, elevation, and vegetation cover, (2) “metadata_instrument_v{x}-{y}.csv” - an instrument metadata file that summarizes sensor information of all sites, including sensor manufacturer and model, measurement height, and sampling and averaging interval of all variables, (3) "data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.csv" - eight data files that contain hourly data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (4) “/figure/data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.png" - eight figures that help visualize data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (5) “/photo/*” - photos of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, and (6) four file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (*_dd.csv) files that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. Notes: (1) Measurement height: Each variable name is followed by conventional positional qualifiers “H_V_R”, where H indicates the relative horizontal positions of that specific variable, V the vertical positions, and R the replicates. In this data package, only the vertical qualifier V varies, and V increases from the highest vertical position (V=1) to the lowest. Variables with the same qualifier are not necessarily measured by the same sensor, and the same variable with the same qualifier across different sites are not necessarily measured at the same height. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor information and measurement heights, and whether a variable is measured below the canopy. (2) Variable availability: Snow depth is not available at ER-PHS3 and SG-EHS7. SWC, soil temperature, and soil bulk EC at the deepest depth (<-1m) are not available at SG-EHS6 and SG-EHS7. The missing value code for numeric variables is -9999, except for SWP. For SWP, the missing value code is +9999, because SWP values are negative. (3) Sampling frequency: Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the increase of sampling frequency of some variables from 30-min to 1-min at ER-PHS1 to 4 in July 2020. (4) Sensors: While the methods of each sensor are not detailed, all sensors are commercially available, and their methods can be found in their manuals. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor manufacturer and model information. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗