Research article

Application of Microbial Geochemical Exploration Technology in Identifying Hydrocarbon Potential of Stratigraphic Traps in Junggar Basin, China

  • Received: 09 October 2017 Accepted: 19 December 2017 Published: 22 December 2017
  • Even though three-dimension seismic has been widely applied in the eastern slope of Fukang sag with several fluvial channel sand bodies identified as in Jurassic Toutunhe group, the hydrocarbon charge of these stratigraphic traps is hard to predict and still of great uncertainty. Microbial geochemical exploration technology (MGCE), which detects the microbial and geochemical anomalies in surface soil, was applied to delineate three hydrocarbon play fairways, identify six favorable prospects and to predict the geochemical properties of the reservoirs at depth. The results of MGCE survey agreed well with the drilling results of 10 wells and demonstrated the applicability and effectiveness of MGCE in the exploration of stratigraphic traps in this area. Furthermore, the integration of geology, geophysics, geochemistry and geo-microbiology, so-called 4G exploration, led to the discovery of the Qigu group as a new hydrocarbon-bearing play in late Jurassic formation in this area. MGCE technology and 4G integrated exploration has not only made the breakthrough of Qigu discovery, but also opened a new model for stratigraphic reservoir exploration in the area.

    Citation: Li Ding, Yubing Wu, Xuechao Liu, Fenfen Liu, Harry Mei. Application of Microbial Geochemical Exploration Technology in Identifying Hydrocarbon Potential of Stratigraphic Traps in Junggar Basin, China[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2017, 3(4): 576-589. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2017.4.576

    Related Papers:

    [1] Oluwafolajimi Adesanya, Tolulope Oduselu, Oluwawapelumi Akin-Ajani, Olubusuyi M. Adewumi, Olusegun G. Ademowo . An exegesis of bacteriophage therapy: An emerging player in the fight against anti-microbial resistance. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(3): 204-230. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020014
    [2] Ashrafus Safa, Jinath Sultana Jime, Farishta Shahel . Cholera toxin phage: structural and functional diversity between Vibrio cholerae biotypes. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(2): 144-151. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020009
    [3] Abdullahi Yusuf Muhammad, Malik Amonov, Chandrika Murugaiah, Atif Amin Baig, Marina Yusoff . Intestinal colonization against Vibrio cholerae: host and microbial resistance mechanisms. AIMS Microbiology, 2023, 9(2): 346-374. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2023019
    [4] Rochelle Keet, Diane Rip . Listeria monocytogenes isolates from Western Cape, South Africa exhibit resistance to multiple antibiotics and contradicts certain global resistance patterns. AIMS Microbiology, 2021, 7(1): 40-58. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2021004
    [5] Ogueri Nwaiwu, Chiugo Claret Aduba . An in silico analysis of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes in Aeromonas plasmids. AIMS Microbiology, 2020, 6(1): 75-91. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2020005
    [6] Chioma Lilian Ozoaduche, Katalin Posta, Balázs Libisch, Ferenc Olasz . Acquired antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas spp., Escherichia coli and Acinetobacter spp. in the Western Balkans and Hungary with a One Health outlook. AIMS Microbiology, 2025, 11(2): 436-461. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2025020
    [7] Philip Serwer . Restoring logic and data to phage-cures for infectious disease. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(4): 706-712. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.4.706
    [8] Rosette Mansour, Mohammad H. El-Dakdouki, Sara Mina . Phylogenetic group distribution and antibiotic resistance of Escherichia coli isolates in aquatic environments of a highly populated area. AIMS Microbiology, 2024, 10(2): 340-362. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2024018
    [9] Neda Askari, Hassan Momtaz, Elahe Tajbakhsh . Acinetobacter baumannii in sheep, goat, and camel raw meat: virulence and antibiotic resistance pattern. AIMS Microbiology, 2019, 5(3): 272-284. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2019.3.272
    [10] Mohammad Abu-Sini, Mohammad A. Al-Kafaween, Rania M. Al-Groom, Abu Bakar Mohd Hilmi . Comparative in vitro activity of various antibiotic against planktonic and biofilm and the gene expression profile in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. AIMS Microbiology, 2023, 9(2): 313-331. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2023017
  • Even though three-dimension seismic has been widely applied in the eastern slope of Fukang sag with several fluvial channel sand bodies identified as in Jurassic Toutunhe group, the hydrocarbon charge of these stratigraphic traps is hard to predict and still of great uncertainty. Microbial geochemical exploration technology (MGCE), which detects the microbial and geochemical anomalies in surface soil, was applied to delineate three hydrocarbon play fairways, identify six favorable prospects and to predict the geochemical properties of the reservoirs at depth. The results of MGCE survey agreed well with the drilling results of 10 wells and demonstrated the applicability and effectiveness of MGCE in the exploration of stratigraphic traps in this area. Furthermore, the integration of geology, geophysics, geochemistry and geo-microbiology, so-called 4G exploration, led to the discovery of the Qigu group as a new hydrocarbon-bearing play in late Jurassic formation in this area. MGCE technology and 4G integrated exploration has not only made the breakthrough of Qigu discovery, but also opened a new model for stratigraphic reservoir exploration in the area.


    V. cholera is a gram-negative, facultative, motile anaerobe that secrets a diarrhoeagenic protein called cholera toxin [1]. The organism has over 200 serogroups, but only the O1 and O139 serogroups have been linked to the diarrheal disease commonly known as cholera [2]. In third world countries, the organism typically transmits by drinking contaminated surface water [3], whereas, in developed countries, transmissions are associated with raw or undercooked shellfish consumption [4]. Cholera is a frequent occurrence in Bangladesh, with seasonal outbreaks occurring annually [5]. Since V. cholera is predominantly an aquatic organism, the propagation and epidemiology of these outbreaks are highly influenced by contaminated water sources and flooding. In most rural areas of Bangladesh, access to potable clean drinking water is minimal, especially during annual flooding. A vast majority of the population still drinks untreated surface water in rural areas of the country and most of these annual outbreak buds in those populations.

    Furthermore, underground water sources like tube wells are often submerged and contaminated by flood water during annual flooding. Thus, it is crucial to perform a comparative study of V. cholera contamination among different surface and underground water sources as a part of consistent surveillance operation. Besides, annual cholera outbreaks are often treated with the same group of antibiotics, resulting in a high antibiotic resistance in V. cholera strains against commonly used antibiotics. A yearly evaluation of the antibiotic resistance profile of field strains is necessary for the effective therapeutic use of available antibiotics. Therefore, this research aimed at quantifying V. spp. in different water sources of Bangladesh and evaluating the antibiotic resistance profile of V. cholera to estimate and mitigate the risk of the annual cholera outbreak.

    A total of 45 environmental water samples were aseptically collected from pond, river and tube-well of different designated areas of Gazipur district, Bangladesh (Benupur, Chandabaha, Kaliakoir, Sutrapur and Begunbari). Following collection 4 samples are then serially diluted in alkaline peptone water and streak on selective media of Thiosulfate Citrate Bile Salts Sucrose (TCBS) agar, (Hi media, India) and incubated 37 °C for 24 hours. Following incubation, colonies with shiny yellow color and smooth, convex, and slightly flattened texture with opaque centers (Figure 1A, 1B) were used in viable count of V. spp. [6]. For bacteria isolation 1 mL of buffer peptone solution (1:10 dilution) was enriched in nutrient broth at 37 °C for 16 hours and then transferred in selective media (TCBS agar plate) for incubation (37 °C for 24 hours). Then one colony was randomly selected from each plate for biochemical analysis and hemolysis test (Figure 1C, 1D).

    Table 1.  Concentration (µg /disc) of antibiotic disc used for antimicrobial resistance test.
    Antibiotics Symbol Disc concentration (µg /disc)
    Ciprofloxacin (CIP) 5
    Gentamycin (GEN) 10
    Penicillin (P) 10
    Vancomycin (VA) 30
    Cephalexin (CN) 30
    Chloramphenicol (C) 30
    Tetracycline (TE) 30
    Erythromycin (E) 15
    Sulfamethoxazole (SXT) 25
    Nalidixic Acid (NA) 30
    Azithromycin (AZ) 15

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    V. spp. isolated in selective media were confirmed as V. cholera by different biochemical tests Catalase, Oxidase, MR, VP, Indole, glucose, maltose, mannitol and sucrose fermentation) according to the methodology described in [7].

    Table 2.  Bacterial concentration in different sources collected from 5 different locations.
    Sample type Bacterial conc. (Log CFU/mL)
    10−3 DF1 10−4 DF1 10−5 DF1
    River 4.96A 5.89A 6.79a
    Pond 4.98A 5.92A 6.80a
    Tube well 4.86B 5.73B 6.06b
    SEM2 0.028 0.035 0.500
    P value <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Antibiotic sensitivity test was performed according to Kriby-Bauer disc diffusion method [9] and following the guideline of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute [8]. A total of 11 commercially available antibiotics were used (Table 1) in this research to assess drug susceptibility and resistance of isolated species (Mast diagnostics Mersey side, UK). A single colony of pure culture isolated from the samples was incubated in nutrient broth at 37 °C for 16 hours. Then 0.1 ml of broth was spread on Mueller-Hinton agar plate using a cell spreader and an antibiotic disc was placed on top. The plates were then incubated in 37 °C for 24 hours. After incubation, the zone of inhibition near the discs was measured using a millimeter scale and categorized as resistant or sensitive according to the manufacturer's recommendation (Table 1).

    Table 3.  V. spp. concentration in water samples of 5 different location (Benupur, Chandabadha, Kaliakoir, Sutrapur and Begunbari).
    Sample type DF1 Bacterial concentration in each location (Log CFU/mL)
    Benupur Chandabaha Kaliakoir Sutrapur Begunbari
    River Burigonga 10−3 4.95 5.00 4.93 4.99 4.94
    10−4 5.88 5.93 5.87 5.90 5.88
    10−5 6.79 6.80 6.81 6.81 6.79
    Pond 10−3 4.94 4.99 5.00 4.99 5.00
    10−4 5.90 5.89 5.93 5.90 5.87
    10−5 6.80 6.79 6.80 6.77 6.72
    Tube-well 10−3 4.91 4.86 4.86 4.83 5.00
    10−4 5.81 5.76 5.71 5.68 5.89
    10−5 6.62 6.52 6.46 6.57 7.00

    Average 5.84 5.83 5.82 5.83 5.90
    SEM2 0.261 0.257 0.261 0.259 0.247

    P-value 0.996

    *Note: CFU= colony forming unite, 1DF = Dilution factor, 2SEM= Standard error of mean

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    A total of 5 replicate samples were randomly collected from each of the 5 different locations (Benupur, Chandabaha, Kaliakoir, Sutrapur, Begunbari) of each 3 water sources (river, pond and tube-well). Bacterial concentration in samples were log transformed and subjected to Shapiro-Wilk test for normality analysis. Bartlett's Test was performed to ensure the homogeneity of variance among the collected samples. The bacterial concentration in different water sources and at different locations were analyzed with one-way ANOVA using the GLM procedure of SAS software (version 9.2) under the following model. Yij = µ + Ti + δL + ϵij. Where, Yij = Bacterial concentration in each sample; µ = Overall mean bacterial concentration; Ti = Effect of water source; δL = Blocking effect of location and ϵij = random error. We assumed that the variation within the model, caused by from sampling location are normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance of σL2. Random error ϵij of the model is also normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance of σ2. Both variances σL2 and σ2 are independent of each other. For data analysis, P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant and when a significant difference is detected, the were subjected to the least significant difference test (LSD) for mean separation.

    Figure 1.  V. spp. on Nutrient's Agar (A), TCBS Agar left the yellow colony and green colony right (B), blood agar hemolytic colony (C), and non-hemolytic colony on blood agar (D).
    Figure 2.  Biochemical test results. Indole test (A), Methyl red test (B), Voges-Proskauer test (C), Simmons citrate test (D), KIA test (E), and MIU test (F).
    Table 4.  Biochemical tests result of 12 isolated strains of V. cholera.
    Tests Results
    R1 R3 R5 R6 R7 P1 P3 P5 P6 T3 T4 T7
    Nit + + + + + + + + + + + +
    Ox + + + + + + - + + + - +
    Ind + + + + - + + + + + + +
    Ci + + + + + + + + + + + +
    MR - - - + - - - + - - - -
    VP + + + + + + + + + + + +
    MIU + + + + + + + - + + + +
    Urease - - - - - - + - - - - -
    KIA Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= - Yb, Ys, G= -H2S= -
    Glucose + + + - + + - + + + - +
    Maltose + + + + + + + + + - + +
    Mannitol + + + + + + + + + + + +
    Sucrose + + + + - + + + + + + +
    Gelatin hydrolysis + + + + + + - + + + + +

    *Note: Legends: SL No.: Serial Number, Nit: Nitrate utilization test, Ox: Oxidase test, In: Indole test, Ci: Citrate test, MR: Methyl Red test, VP: Voges-Proskauer test, MIU: Motility indole urease, KIA: Kinglar iron agar +: positive, -: Negative, Y: Yellow, B: Butt, S: Slant, G: Gas.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Viable counts were performed on TCBS agar plate which selects V. spp. based on their sucrose fermentation characteristics and the result is presented in Table 2. There was significantly higher V. spp. in pond and river water than tube-well water (P < 0.001) at all 3 dilution levels (dilution factor: 103, 104 and 105). Bacterial concentration did not vary significantly based on the location of sample collection (P > 0.05) (Table 3).

    Table 5.  Comparative prevalence of V. cholera among the V. spp. isolated from different water sources.
    Bacterial isolate River water Pond water Tube well water Total isolates Percentage (%)
    V. cholera 5 (41.67%) 4 (40%) 3(37.5%) 12 40
    V. parahimulyticus 7 (58.33%) 6 (60%) 5 (62.5%) 18 60
    Total isolates 12 10 8 30

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Total of 14 biochemical tests were performed on isolates of different samples and the result of those tests are presented in Table 4. Out of the 30 isolates, 12 isolates were positive in nitrate, oxidase, indole, citrate utilization, MR, motility, glucose, sucrose, mannitol, maltose, and gelatin hydrolysis agar test (Figure 2A, 2F). V. spp. were also found to be negative in MR, urease, and kingler iron agar test. Hemolytic characteristics of the isolates were also evaluated to differentiate between V. cholera and V. parahaemolyticus (Figure 1C, 1D). V. cholera are known to cause β-hemolysis whereas V. parahaemolyticus causes α-hemolysis. Based on this characteristic 12 of the initial isolates were classified as V. cholera and remaining 18 was classified as V. parahaemolyticus.

    The comparative prevalence of V. cholera among the V. spp. isolated from different water sources are presented in Table 5. River water had the highest prevalence of V. cholera (5 out of 12 isolates; 41.67%) whereas, tube-well water had the lowest prevalence (3 out of 8; 37.5%).

    Table 6.  Outcome of antibiotic sensitivity test of 12 V. cholera isolates obtained from different water samples.
    Isolate GEN CIP CN VA P C TE E NA AZ SXT
    R1 S S S R R S S I I S S
    R3 S S S R R S S R R S S
    R5 S S S I R S I R R S S
    R6 S S S R R S I I R R S
    R7 S S S R R R R R R S S
    P1 S S S R R S R R R S S
    P3 S S S R R S R R R S M
    P5 S S S R R I I R R S S
    P6 S S I I I S I R R R S
    T3 S S I R R S S I R S S
    T4 S S R R R S S I R S S
    T7 S S R I R S I R R S S

    *Note: GEN: Gentamycin, CIP: Ciprofloxacin, CN: Cephalexin, VA: Vancomycin, P: Penicillin, C: Chloramphenicol, TE: Tetracycline, E: Erythromycin, NA: Nalidixic Acid, AZ: Azithromycin, SXT: Sulfamethoxazole, R: River, P; Pond; T; Tap, s: Sensitive and r: Resistance. R1, R3, R5, R6, R7 are the V. cholera isolates collected from rivers, P1, P3, P5 and P6 are the V. cholera isolates collected from pond, T3, T4 and T7 are the V. cholera isolates collected from tube-well.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The results of antibiotic sensitivity test performed on 12 V. cholera isolates are presented in Table 6. The antibiotic sensitivity profiles of those isolates have been compiled in Table 7. All 12 isolates showed 100% sensitivity toward Gentamicin and ciprofloxacin. All the isolates showed multidrug resistance (Table 6). However, these isolates were susceptible to Chloramphenicol (91.67%), and Sulfamethoxazole (91.67%). Azithromycin (66.67%). Tetracycline (33.33%), and Cephalexin (16.67%) had moderate to low sensitivity. All 12 isolates showed 100% resistance toward Penicillin, Vancomycin, Erythromycin, and Nalidixic Acid. This result is congruent with the study of [10] performed in neighboring country Nepal, where they found their isolates sensitive to Ciprofloxacin, Ampicillin, and resistant to Nalidixic acid. However, unlike this study, their isolates also showed higher sensitivity toward Erythromycin and Tetracycline. The majority of resistance in environmental species are thought to have originated from historically resistant organisms. As a result, it's essential to keep track of both the frequency and the antimicrobial resistance profile of V. cholera to identify the high-risk water sources. To minimize the risk of cholera transmission through contaminated water, we recommend screening various water sources against this pathogenic bacteria before using it for washing, drinking and irrigation. Vulnerable populations, especially farmers in rural areas, should take appropriate precautions to avoid cholera transmission through water [11]. There were some limitations to our research. Due to the funding constrain, a limited number of samples were collected, which might not be sufficient to draw a precise conclusion. Our analysis still lacks molecular characterization of the isolates, which might have strengthened our conclusion.

    Table 7.  Antibiotic sensitivity profile of 12 isolates V. spp. obtained from different water samples.
    Organism Antibiotics Susceptibility (%) Resistance (%)
    V. cholera Gentamycin (GEN) 12(100%) 0(0%)
    Ciprofloxacin (CIP) 12(100%) 0(0%)
    Cephalexin (CN) 2(16.67%) 10(83.33%)
    Vancomycin (VA) 0(0%) 12(100%)
    Penicillin (P) 0(0%) 12(100%)
    Chloramphenicol (C) 11(91.67%) 1(8.33%)
    Tetracycline (TE) 4(33.33%) 8(66.67%)
    Erythromycin (E) 0(0%) 12(100%)
    Sulfamethoxazole (SXT) 11(91.67%) 1(8.33%)
    Nalidixic Acid (NA) 0(0%) 12(100%)
    Azithromycin (AZ) 8(66.67%) 4(33.33%)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Based on the data of our experiment we conclude that V. cholera is endemic to the surface water sources like pond and river in Gazipur region of Bangladesh. Underground water like tube well has comparatively lower concentration of V. cholera Antibiotics like, Gentamicin, Ciprofloxacin, Chloramphenicol, Sulfamethoxazole and Azithromycin are highly effective against the V. cholera isolates collected in this study. We suggest the application of these antibiotics in therapeutics of annual cholera outbreak. Furthermore, we highly recommend prioritizing underground water over surface water as drinking water source.

    [1] Jun Jin, Loujun Liu, Yu Shao, et al. (2002) Identification of lithologic traps in Junggar basin by comprehensive geophysical method. Oil Geophys Prospect 37: 287-290.
    [2] Mai Chang, Zhen Liu, Quansheng Liang, et al. (2007) Forming conditions and main controlling factors of the Middle-Upper Jurassic lithologic traps on East Fukang Slope, Junggar basin. Journal of Xi'an Shiyou University(Natural Science Edition) 22: 20-23.
    [3] Qin Zhang, Guiwen Wang, Xiaomin Zhu (2001) Well Logging Sedimentary facies of the Jurassic in east fukang slope of junggar basin. J Palaeogeogr 3: 41-47
    [4] Saunders DF, Buraon KR, Thompson CK (1999) Model for hydrocarbon microseepage and related near-surface alterations. AAPG Bull 83: 1702185.
    [5] Brown A (2000) Evaluation of possible gas microseepage mechanisms. AAPG Bull 84: 177521789.
    [6] Abrams MA (2005) Significance of hydrocarbon seepage relative to petroleum generation and entrapment. Mar Pet Geol 22: 457-477. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2004.08.003
    [7] Hai Mei, Renzi Lin, Bowen Mei, et al. (2008) Microbial Oil gas Detection Technologies: Theory, Practice and Application Prospect. Nat Gas Geosci 19: 888-893.
    [8] Renzi Lin, Hai Mei, Bowen Mei (2009) The application and prospects of Microbial Exploration technology. Mar Geol Lett 25: 36-42.
    [9] Chunlin Zhang, Xiongqi Pang, Hai Mei, et al. (2010)Application and Progress of Microbial Oil Survey Technique (MOST). Xinjiang Pet Geol 31: 310-315.
    [10] Mei BW, Wu M, Sun ZJ, et al. (2011) Microbial geochemical (MGCE) detection test of natural gas hydrate in permafrost of Muli area, Tianjun County, Qinghai Province. Geol Bull China 30: 1891-1895.
    [11] Chao Peng, Hongchen Jiang, Liuqin Huang, et al. (2013) Abundance and Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Bacteria and Archaea in Cold Springs on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Geomicrobiol J 30: 530-539. doi: 10.1080/01490451.2012.737089
    [12] Chunlin Zhang, Xiongqi Pang, Hai Mei, et al. (2010) Application and progress of microbial oil survey technique(MOST). Xinjiang Pet Geol 31: 320-322.
    [13] Chenzhi Yan, Hesheng Shi, et al. (2014) Applying a technique of microbiological geochemistry to hydrocarbon exploration in Baiyun sag deep water area. China Offshore Oil Gas 26:15-19.
    [14] Lijuan He (2015)Applying Microbial Geochemical Exploration Technology for hydrocarbon detection of Lingshui Sag in Deepwater area of Qiongdongnan Basin. China Offshore Oil Gas 27: 61-67
    [15] Chun Hao (2015) Microbial Geochemical Exploration Technology and Prospect for Its Application in South China Sea Deepwater Exploration. China Pet Explor 20: 55-62.
    [16] Lu B, Zhang J, Li T, et al. (2008) Analysis of tectonic framework in Junggar Basin. Xinjiang Pet Geol 29: 283-289.
    [17] Yu Jingwei, Li Lulu, Qi Liqi, et al. (2014) Reservoir controlling factors of Toutunhe No.2 member in Fudong slope zone in eastern Junggar basin. Xinjiang Pet Geol 35: 34-38.
    [18] Yu Jingwei, Ren Wei, Wang Wuxue, et al. (2015) Formation Mechanism of Toutunhe Abnormal Pressure of Middle Jurassic in Fudong Slope Area, Junggar Basin. Xinjiang Pet Geol 36: 521-525
    [19] Shang L, Dai JS, Liu X, et al. (2011) Sedimentary source analysis of Jurassic Toutunhe Formation in Beisantai area in Junggar Basin. Global Geol 30: 579-584.
    [20] Zhu XM, zhang YN, Yang JS, et al. (2008) Sedimentary characteristics of the shallow Jurassic braided revier delta, the Junggar Basin. Oil Gas Geol 29: 244-251.
    [21] Debnam AH (1969) Geochemical prospecting for petroleum and natural gas in Canada. Geol Surv Can Bull 177.
    [22] Tedesco SA (1995) Surface Geochemistry in Petroleum Exploration. J Geochem Explor 1: 43-44.
    [23] Sun Zhongjun, Yang Zhibin, Mei Hai, et al. (2014). Geochemical characteristics of shallow soil above the Muli gas hydrate reservoir in the permafrost region of Geochemical Exploration. J Geochem Explor 139: 160-169. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2013.10.006
    [24] Chun Hao (2015) Microbial Geochemical Exploration and Research on Gas Hydrate in Sanlutian of Muli, Qinghai Province. Geosci 29: 1157-1163.
    [25] Jones VT, Drond RJ (1983) Predications of oil or gas potential by near surface geochemistry. AAPG Bull 67: 932-952.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Prasanga Madhushani Kumarage, Liyana Arachchilage Dinithi Sandunika De Silva, Gang-Joon Heo, Aquatic environments: A potential source of antimicrobial-resistant Vibrio spp., 2022, 133, 1365-2672, 2267, 10.1111/jam.15702
    2. Raquiba Sultana, Al Mahmud, Sayad Mahmud Koli, Jannatul Nayema, Aboni Ghosh, Susmita Banik Sushree, Pranta Shom, Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui, Kamal Kanta Das, Mrityunjoy Acharjee, Isolation and Identification of Vibrio Species from Different Types of Water Sources Along with Their Drug Susceptible Pattern, 2024, 8, 2588-9834, 207, 10.4103/bbrj.bbrj_138_24
    3. Aaron Awere‐Duodu, Onyansaniba K. Ntim, Eric S. Donkor, Vibrio cholerae in Water Environments: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis, 2025, 17, 1758-2229, 10.1111/1758-2229.70103
    4. Bright E IGERE, ONOHUEAN Hope, P.O Adomi, T Bashiru Abeni, Phenicol antibiotic resistance status amongst environmental non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae and Clinical O1/O139 Vibrio cholerae strains: a systematic review and meta-synthesis, 2025, 29501946, 100474, 10.1016/j.microb.2025.100474
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(6056) PDF downloads(1165) Cited by(1)

Figures and Tables

Figures(6)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog