生物硅与地质类似物的矿物学表征

IF 2.7 2区 地球科学 Q2 BIOLOGY
Geobiology Pub Date : 2023-02-27 DOI:10.1111/gbi.12553
Gabriela A. Farfan, David A. McKeown, Jeffrey E. Post
{"title":"生物硅与地质类似物的矿物学表征","authors":"Gabriela A. Farfan,&nbsp;David A. McKeown,&nbsp;Jeffrey E. Post","doi":"10.1111/gbi.12553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Non-crystalline silica mineraloids are essential to life on Earth as they provide architectural structure to dominant primary producers, such as plants and phytoplankton, as well as to protists and sponges. Due to the difficulty in characterizing and quantifying the structure of highly disordered X-ray amorphous silica, relatively little has been done to understand the mineralogy of biogenic silica and how this may impact the material properties of biogenic silica, such as hardness and strength, or how biosilica might be identified and differentiated from its inorganic geological counterparts. Typically, geologically formed opal-A and hyalite opal-A<sub>N</sub> are regarded as analogs to biogenic silica, however, some spectroscopic and imaging studies suggest that this might not be a reasonable assumption. In this study, we use a variety of techniques (X-ray diffraction, Raman spectroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy) to compare differences in structural disorder and bonding environments of geologically formed hydrous silicas (Opal-A, hyalite, geyserite) and silica glass versus biogenic silicas from an array of organisms. Our results indicate differences in the levels of structural disorder and the Raman-observed bonding environments of the SiO<sub>2</sub> network modes (D<sub>1</sub> mode) and the Q-species modes (~1015 cm<sup>−1</sup>) between varieties of biogenic silicas and geologically formed silicas, which aligns with previous studies that suggest fundamental differences between biogenic and geologically formed silica. Biosilicas also differ structurally from one another by species of organism. Our mineralogical approach to characterizing biosilicas and differentiating them from other silicas may be expanded to future diagenesis studies, and potentially applied to astrobiology studies of Earth and other planets.</p>","PeriodicalId":173,"journal":{"name":"Geobiology","volume":"21 4","pages":"520-533"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gbi.12553","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mineralogical characterization of biosilicas versus geological analogs\",\"authors\":\"Gabriela A. Farfan,&nbsp;David A. McKeown,&nbsp;Jeffrey E. Post\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/gbi.12553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Non-crystalline silica mineraloids are essential to life on Earth as they provide architectural structure to dominant primary producers, such as plants and phytoplankton, as well as to protists and sponges. Due to the difficulty in characterizing and quantifying the structure of highly disordered X-ray amorphous silica, relatively little has been done to understand the mineralogy of biogenic silica and how this may impact the material properties of biogenic silica, such as hardness and strength, or how biosilica might be identified and differentiated from its inorganic geological counterparts. Typically, geologically formed opal-A and hyalite opal-A<sub>N</sub> are regarded as analogs to biogenic silica, however, some spectroscopic and imaging studies suggest that this might not be a reasonable assumption. In this study, we use a variety of techniques (X-ray diffraction, Raman spectroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy) to compare differences in structural disorder and bonding environments of geologically formed hydrous silicas (Opal-A, hyalite, geyserite) and silica glass versus biogenic silicas from an array of organisms. Our results indicate differences in the levels of structural disorder and the Raman-observed bonding environments of the SiO<sub>2</sub> network modes (D<sub>1</sub> mode) and the Q-species modes (~1015 cm<sup>−1</sup>) between varieties of biogenic silicas and geologically formed silicas, which aligns with previous studies that suggest fundamental differences between biogenic and geologically formed silica. Biosilicas also differ structurally from one another by species of organism. Our mineralogical approach to characterizing biosilicas and differentiating them from other silicas may be expanded to future diagenesis studies, and potentially applied to astrobiology studies of Earth and other planets.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geobiology\",\"volume\":\"21 4\",\"pages\":\"520-533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gbi.12553\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geobiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gbi.12553\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geobiology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gbi.12553","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

非晶体二氧化硅类矿物质对地球上的生命至关重要,因为它们为主要的初级生产者(如植物和浮游植物)以及原生生物和海绵提供了建筑结构。由于难以表征和量化高度无序的x射线无定形二氧化硅的结构,相对而言,很少有人了解生物源二氧化硅的矿物学,以及这可能如何影响生物源二氧化硅的材料性质,如硬度和强度,或者如何识别和区分生物二氧化硅与无机二氧化硅的地质对应物。通常,地质上形成的蛋白石- a和透明质蛋白石- an被认为是生物二氧化硅的类似物,然而,一些光谱和成像研究表明,这可能不是一个合理的假设。在这项研究中,我们使用各种技术(x射线衍射、拉曼光谱和扫描电子显微镜)来比较地质形成的含水二氧化硅(蛋白石- a、透明石、硅华石)和硅玻璃与来自一系列生物体的生物源二氧化硅的结构紊乱和键合环境的差异。我们的研究结果表明,不同种类的生物源二氧化硅和地质形成的二氧化硅在结构无序程度和拉曼观察到的SiO2网络模式(D1模式)和q -物种模式(~1015 cm−1)的键合环境上存在差异,这与之前的研究结果一致,表明生物源二氧化硅和地质形成二氧化硅之间存在根本差异。不同种类的生物硅在结构上也各不相同。我们用矿物学方法来表征生物硅并将其与其他硅区分开来,这可能会扩展到未来的成岩作用研究中,并有可能应用于地球和其他行星的天体生物学研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mineralogical characterization of biosilicas versus geological analogs

Non-crystalline silica mineraloids are essential to life on Earth as they provide architectural structure to dominant primary producers, such as plants and phytoplankton, as well as to protists and sponges. Due to the difficulty in characterizing and quantifying the structure of highly disordered X-ray amorphous silica, relatively little has been done to understand the mineralogy of biogenic silica and how this may impact the material properties of biogenic silica, such as hardness and strength, or how biosilica might be identified and differentiated from its inorganic geological counterparts. Typically, geologically formed opal-A and hyalite opal-AN are regarded as analogs to biogenic silica, however, some spectroscopic and imaging studies suggest that this might not be a reasonable assumption. In this study, we use a variety of techniques (X-ray diffraction, Raman spectroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy) to compare differences in structural disorder and bonding environments of geologically formed hydrous silicas (Opal-A, hyalite, geyserite) and silica glass versus biogenic silicas from an array of organisms. Our results indicate differences in the levels of structural disorder and the Raman-observed bonding environments of the SiO2 network modes (D1 mode) and the Q-species modes (~1015 cm−1) between varieties of biogenic silicas and geologically formed silicas, which aligns with previous studies that suggest fundamental differences between biogenic and geologically formed silica. Biosilicas also differ structurally from one another by species of organism. Our mineralogical approach to characterizing biosilicas and differentiating them from other silicas may be expanded to future diagenesis studies, and potentially applied to astrobiology studies of Earth and other planets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geobiology
Geobiology 生物-地球科学综合
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.40%
发文量
56
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The field of geobiology explores the relationship between life and the Earth''s physical and chemical environment. Geobiology, launched in 2003, aims to provide a natural home for geobiological research, allowing the cross-fertilization of critical ideas, and promoting cooperation and advancement in this emerging field. We also aim to provide you with a forum for the rapid publication of your results in an international journal of high standing. We are particularly interested in papers crossing disciplines and containing both geological and biological elements, emphasizing the co-evolutionary interactions between life and its physical environment over geological time. Geobiology invites submission of high-quality articles in the following areas: Origins and evolution of life Co-evolution of the atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere The sedimentary rock record and geobiology of critical intervals Paleobiology and evolutionary ecology Biogeochemistry and global elemental cycles Microbe-mineral interactions Biomarkers Molecular ecology and phylogenetics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信