Reaction principles, deposition and failure mechanisms and theories of biomineralization: progress and challenges
-
摘要: 微生物矿化作为地质演变及碳氮循环不可或缺的一环，给岩土、水利及环境等领域带来了新的机遇和挑战，其衍生而来的以MICP为代表的微生物岩土技术已成为环境岩土工程最具革新性的技术领域之一。近20年来，微生物岩土技术从概念验证阶段到相关领域技术示范已取得了重要进展。为推进对该领域更加深入的基础认识与研究，本文系统回顾了MICP技术并针对以下3部分进行了重点阐述：脲酶菌成矿作用的生物化学原理、微生物加固土的沉积模式及加固体破坏机理、涉及生物-化学-水力-力学等多物理场耦合作用下的微生物矿化反应理论。此外，还总结了微生物岩土技术目前亟待解决的问题与挑战，对潜在的研究热点与应用前景进行了探讨和展望。Abstract: The biomineralization is an integral part of geological evolution and carbon-nitrogen cycle, and it has brought new opportunities and challenges in the geotechnical, water conservancy and environmental fields. The inspired bio-geotechnical technology represented by the MICP process has become one of the most innovative technological topics in the environmental geotechnical engineering. In the last two decades, the bio-geotechnical technology has made significant progress from the proof-of-concept phase to the technology demonstration in the relevant environments. In order to promote more comprehensive and in-depth basic understanding and researches on this topic, a systematic review of the MICP technology is performed, focusing on the following three parts: biochemical principles of urease-producing bacteria-induced biomineralization, precipitation patterns and failure mechanisms of bio-cemented soil, and theories of biomineralization reaction under the multi-physics coupling effects of bio-chemo-hydro-mechanical model. Furthermore, the current problems and challenges of bio-geotechnical technology are summarized, and the potential research hot spots and application prospects are discussed.
-
0. 引言
随着中国基础设施建设迅速发展,出现了一系列边坡问题和生态环境问题,生态护坡技术受到广泛使用和认可。生态护坡目前是以工程技术如格构梁和挡墙为主,辅之以植被护坡。植被护坡的主要机理是利用根系穿插在土壤中形成对土体“加筋锚固”的作用,达到加固边坡的目的。根系增加土体抗剪强度的特性对防治浅层滑坡等地质灾害具有理论指导意义[1-2]。
植被根系在土体中交错穿插,构成复杂的生物网络,显著提高土体的抗剪强度,由于根系的作用和植物对土壤饱和度指标的改变进而对边坡起到很强的加固作用[3]。影响根系固土作用的因素包括根系因素和土壤因素,目前很多学者开展了室内直剪试验和现场原位试验,探究不同因素对根-土复合体抗剪强度特性的影响。Operstein等[4]与Mickovski等[5]对不同植物根系与土体形成的根土复合体开展直剪试验,发现根密度对抗剪强度影响较大。Mao等[6]和Bourrier等[7]通过含根土体的室内直剪试验证实在土体含水率相同时,抗剪强度随根径增大而增大。周云艳等[8]利用樟树根系进行原位剪切试验,发现剪切断面上的总根长、根面积比与土体抗剪强度的增量呈正相关。另外植被种类、埋根方式[9]、根系生长形态等也在不同程度上影响植被根系的固土阻滑效果。
关于根土复合体中土体因素对抗剪强度影响研究方面。周成等[10]开展了侧限膨胀试验和直剪试验,测定有、无香根草根系的试样在不同初始含水率时的膨胀力和抗剪强度指标。Fan等[11]通过原位剪切试验,研究土体含水率对根-土复合体抗剪强度的影响,表明土壤抗剪强度随含水率增大而减小,在土体含水率较大时根系增加抗剪强度更明显。
以上均是关于植被根系对土体的力学加固作用,有学者认为降雨入渗优先流使地下水上升和坡土强度降低对边坡稳定性的负面影响更值得关注[12]。降雨作用下植物边坡经常会发生沿着根系以下土层的滑坡,可能意味着降雨入渗优先流所导致的降雨影响深度和坡土强度损失值,都大于根系力学加筋的作用深度和坡土强度提高值。降雨入渗优先流和植物根系太短是造成植被覆盖边坡降雨失稳破坏的两大主因。受水平向加筋土技术的启发[13],拟用竖向植筋带来弥补和提高植物短根系的力学加筋抵抗降雨滑坡的能力[14-15]。
本文选择植筋带和根系结构简单的空心莲子草根系,通过自制的大型剪切试验装置,开展根系固土与植筋带固土的剪切试验,研究空心莲子草根系不同倾角对土体抗剪强度的影响从而探究植被护坡的力学机理,研究植筋带数量、植筋带干湿状态和土体含水率对植筋带固土效果的影响,为植筋带应用于植物边坡的浅层滑坡防治提供理论参考。
1. 试验方案
为测定不同根系倾角根-土复合体的强度变化规律,与不同应力水平、不同植筋带数量和土体含水率等条件下植筋带增加的界面抗剪强度值,分别开展根系和植筋带固土的大型直剪试验。
1.1 试验材料
试验用根系为形态简单的空心莲子草根系[16],野外挖掘的根系假植于实验室模型箱中,用试验土料浅埋并保持土壤湿润,保证试验根系的活性。植筋带为1 cm宽的尼龙织带,具有较大的抗拉强度。根系和植筋带固土的剪切试验所用土料分别为含砾和粉土质砂的低液限黏土,物理力学参数见表1。
表 1 试验土体物理力学参数Table 1. Physical and mechanical parameters of test soils大型根系直剪试验 植筋带剪切试验 参数 取值 参数 取值 相对密度Gs 2.66 相对密度Gs 2.68 液限wL/% 33.7 不均匀系数Cu 11.1 塑限wp/% 20 曲率系数Cc 1.44 ρdmax/(g·cm-3) 1.75 ρdmax/(g·cm-3) 1.89 wop/% 17 ρdmin/(g·cm-3) 1.39 ksat/(cm·s-1) 8.15×10-5 黏聚力c/kPa 9.1 内摩擦角φ/(°) 30.3 1.2 试验装置
为探究根系在不同倾角下的固土效应和植筋带的加固效果,自行设计和加工剪切试验装置,包括剪切盒、大量程百分表（量程1～50 mm）、千斤顶（最大量程1 T,最大位移442 mm）、测力计系统（包括力传感器及附带的电子显示器,最大量程500 kg,精度0.1 kg）。剪切盒由厚2 cm的工程塑料板加工而成,尺寸为20 cm×20 cm×20 cm（长×宽×高）。大型剪切盒下的基土放置在尺寸为755 mm×530 mm×500 mm的模型箱中,如图1所示（
α 为根系与竖直方向的夹角）。在植筋带固土的剪切试验中,为了主要测定竖向植筋带的固土效应,省掉了下面的直剪盒,在上剪切盒的底部固定一排竹筏模拟滑床并锚固植筋带,如图2所示。![]()
图 1 根系固土的直剪试验侧视图Figure 1. Side view of direct shear tests on soil reinforcement by roots![]()
图 2 植筋带固土的直剪试验布置图Figure 2. Layout of direct shear tests on soil reinforcement by geotextile belts1.3 试样制备
根系固土的大型直剪试验：大直剪盒中土体试样填筑干密度参考了其他学者测定的天然边坡密度,最终取值为1.48 g/cm3,含水率为12%。制样前在剪切盒内壁和轨道上涂抹凡士林,以减小剪切盒内壁与土体及剪切盒和轨道之间的摩擦。模型箱与剪切盒均采用分层静压的填筑方法,每层填筑完成后凿毛表面进行下一层填筑,保证上下填筑层接触紧密。为防止产生薄弱剪切面,需将模型箱表面土体凿毛深约5 cm,并将模型箱最后一层土体和剪切部分第一层土体一起填筑,以便使剪切面不会发生在制样分层处。在填筑有根系试样时,选取无损伤、生长平直的活性根系,填筑时用小锉刀轻轻击实根系周围土体,以保证根系和周围土体接触良好,有效发挥根系固土作用。将试样遮盖静置,使其在自重应力下固结稳定并让水分充分扩散均匀。
植筋带固土的大型剪切试验：制样前在剪切盒底部铺一层无纺布,防止土料漏出。为保证填筑的均匀性,采用分层填土、分层压实的方法,填筑干密度控制为1.45 g/cm3。制备含植筋带试样时,首先将相应数量的植筋带按设计间距锚固在模拟滑动面的竹竿上,穿过预先在无纺布上剪好的小孔,再分层填土压实,整个制样过程始终保持植筋带处于垂直拉紧状态。考虑到根系埋深较浅,自重应都力较小,因此通过在试样顶部施加均匀的3.0,12.9,22.7 kPa的法向应力,来近似模拟现场根系固土试样的法向应力。
1.4 剪切过程
将千斤顶、测力计系统、百分表安装至平行于剪切方向的试样两侧,确保百分表指针垂直于剪切盒,并将百分表初始读数和测力计电子显示器读数都调为零。为避免剪切过程中剪切盒上翘,测力计应尽量靠近剪切面中心线,以减小剪力产生的弯矩作用。剪切装置安装完成后,检查测力计与剪切盒、百分表指针与剪切盒是否接触良好,确定无误后开始剪切,控制加载速率约为2～3 mm/min。为保证剪力和剪切位移的一一对应,整个试验全程采用视频记录,每隔5 s自动读取测力计和百分表读数。
2. 试验结果与分析
2.1 单根根系加固土体的直剪试验结果分析
在根系固土的大型直剪试验中,试样发生较大的剪切变形,数据处理时考虑面积修正,并扣除系统的摩擦,采用下式计算剪应力大小：
τ=F−fS, (1) 式中,S为剪切面有效面积（m2）,S=B×(L-x),B为剪切面宽度（m）,L为剪切面长度（m）,x为剪切位移（m）,F为千斤顶推力（kN）,f为空剪切盒与基土之间的滑动摩擦力（kN）。
素土试样的剪切结果表明,其剪切破坏面较光滑,剪切曲线呈软化型,在剪切位移为1.5 mm左右即达到峰值强度,测得素土的抗剪强度指标c为6.94 kPa,φ为27.8°。
（1）剪切面破坏形态分析
无法向应力时,得到不同倾角单根根系的剪切面的破坏形态。与素土相比,单根工况下的剪切面较为粗糙,凹凸不平,根系的存在增加了剪切面摩擦作用,有效提高土体抗剪强度。单根0°时,根系在剪切面处被拉断；而单根30°,45°和60°工况下,根系在剪切面以下被拉断,根系拉拔现象明显。但根系与周围土体接触良好,没有被整体拔出,根土界面摩擦作用能有效发挥,剪切完成后根系的变形特征详见表2。
表 2 试验前后根系长度变化Table 2. Change of root length before and after tests根系倾角/(°) 原长度/cm 剪切后长度/cm 拉伸长度/cm 根系拉伸应变/% 0 29.1 29.9 0.8 2.75 30 28.0 28.9 0.9 3.21 45 29.5 30.5 1.0 3.39 60 30.5 32.3 1.8 5.90 （2）剪切曲线分析
剪切过程中严格控制剪切速率,使剪切盒在剪切过程中几乎做匀速运动。不同倾角单根根系的固土剪切曲线如图3所示,结果表明,根系在剪切过程中均发生断裂,对应剪切曲线上剪应力突然陡降的突变点,但根系倾角不同,根系断裂对应的剪切位移不一样,根系提高的强度也不一样,汇总出不同倾角单根根系固土的剪切试验结果如表3所示。
表 3 单根根系不同倾角时根-土复合体抗剪强度对比Table 3. Comparison of shear strengths of root-soil composite under different inclinations of single root工况 根系倾角/(°) 峰值抗剪强度/kPa 残余强度/kPa 峰值强度增幅/% 残余强度增幅/% 素土 — 7.84 4.3 — — 单根 0 9.31 6.2 18.75 44.19 30 10.57 6.0 34.82 37.21 45 10.89 7.1 38.90 65.12 60 11.26 7.9 42.22 83.72 由试验结果对比可知,有根系存在时根-土复合体抗剪强度高于素土,倾斜根系较垂直根系固土效果好,随单根倾角的增加,根系的拉伸变形量增加,根系提供的峰值抗剪强度增加,峰值强度增加的幅度也随之增加。不同倾角单根根系断裂对应的剪切位移不一样,倾斜根系较垂直根系而言更易发生断裂,且随着根系倾角的增加,根系断裂时对应剪切位移减小。0°单根在剪切位移为41 mm时发生断裂,30°单根在剪切位移为31 mm时发生断裂,45°单根在剪切位移为14 mm时发生断裂,60°单根在剪切位移为11 mm时发生断裂。
2.2 竖向植筋带固土的直剪试验结果及分析
通过对土样开展不同土体含水率、不同植筋带数量、不同法向应力下的直剪试验,得到剪应力与剪切位移关系曲线如图4所示,限于篇幅仅展示无植筋带与2根植筋带加固工况下的剪切曲线。有植筋带时扣除了素土样在底部滑面上的摩阻力（即扣除了直剪盒水平剪切面的抗剪强度贡献）以便主要测定分析竖向植筋带-土体界面的抗剪强度贡献。
![]()
图 4 不同加固工况下剪应力与剪切位移的关系曲线Figure 4. Relation curves between shear stress and shear displacement under different working conditions图4反映了不同土体含水率下、不同布筋数量植筋带固土的抗剪强度增强效果。从图4（a）看出,无植筋带时剪应力与剪切位移曲线在剪切初期较陡,随着剪切位移增大,曲线趋于平缓。从图4（b）可以看出,有植筋带时,随着剪切的发生,含植筋带试样的剪应力与剪切位移大致呈线性增长关系。
（1）土体含水率对抗剪强度的影响
从图4可以看出,植筋带数量与法向应力一定时,含水率越大,剪切位移曲线位置相对越低。在其他条件一定时,抗剪强度随含水率的增大而减小,依次为
τ0%>τ5%>τ10% 。以不同土体含水率条件下布置2条植筋带的抗剪强度为例,利用Origin软件对含水率分别为0%,5%,10%的土体在竖向植筋带加固下的筋带-土界面抗剪强度试验结果（即扣除了素土样在底部滑面上摩阻力后的计算结果）进行拟合,拟合结果如图5所示。
![]()
图 5 竖向植筋带固土作用下的抗剪强度包线Figure 5. Envelopes of shear strength reinforced by vertical geotextile belts从图5可知,在不同土体含水率下,正应力与抗剪强度之间的拟合曲线为直线,相关系数均大于0.9,证明了竖向植筋带对土体抗剪强度的增加作用符合库伦强度理论。图5中拟合曲线的斜率表示植筋带固土对内摩擦角的影响,曲线截距则反映黏聚力的影响。显然随着土体含水率增大,内摩擦角与黏聚力均减小,该结论与王华等[17]对狗牙根、早熟禾边坡客土层剪切得到的结果一致,即随着土体含水量增加,抗剪强度随之减小,呈负相关的关系。
图6为筋带-土体界面抗剪强度指标随植筋带数量的变化曲线（按扣除素土样在底部滑面上摩阻力后的计算结果绘制）,从该图看出在竖向植筋带固土作用下,无论是内摩擦角还是黏聚力,土体含水率低的曲线始终位于含水率高的曲线上面。土体含水率从0%增至5%,10%,内摩擦角每次降低的值相差不大,但黏聚力在含水率0%增至5%时,减小幅度较小,从5%含水率增至10%时,黏聚力大幅度减小。
![]()
图 6 竖向植筋带固土作用下的界面抗剪强度指标与植筋带数量之间的关系曲线Figure 6. Relation curves between interfacial shear strength index and quantity of belts reinforced by geotextile belts如果竖向植筋带本身是湿润的,则相同土体含水率（5%）的曲线比干燥的还要下移,相应筋带-土界面抗剪强度及其指标整理于表4中。土体含水率一定时（例如5%）,相比干燥状态,植筋带湿润会显著降低黏聚力与内摩擦角的值。
表 4 竖向植筋带湿润状态下的筋带-土体界面抗剪强度与抗剪强度指标（5%土体含水率）Table 4. Shear strengths and shear strength indexes of belt-soil interface under wet geotextile belts (moisture content of soils of 5%)植筋带 数量 不同法向应力下的界面 抗剪强度/kPa 界面抗剪强度 指标 3.0 12.9 22.7 c/kPa φ/(°) 2 0.97 3.38 4.83 0.5 11.1 4 2.40 4.78 7.30 1.6 14.0 6 4.47 8.76 11.18 3.7 18.8 8 5.76 8.96 13.79 4.3 22.2 注： 整理的试验结果没有考虑水平剪切面的抗剪强度,相当于额外增加了剪切面和抗剪强度。（2）植筋带数量对抗剪强度的影响
从图6看出,土体含水率一定时,随着植筋带数量增加,测定的内摩擦角与黏聚力明显增大,这是植筋带与土体界面之间摩擦力增加的结果,因为植筋带自身具备较高的抗拉强度,推力在植筋带范围的土中产生的剪切应力通过植筋带的表面黏结摩擦力转化为对它的拉力,从而实现加筋作用,增大抗剪强度值,含水率较高则会减小这种加筋作用。
从图6还可知,“竖向植筋带湿润+5%的土体含水率”的曲线与“竖向植筋带干燥+10%的土体含水率”的曲线十分接近,前者摩擦角在植筋带数量为4根与6根时甚至低于后者,表明此时竖向植筋带的干湿状态对内摩擦角的影响大于土体含水率的影响,这也说明竖向植筋带-土体界面特性的重要性。竖向植筋带与实际根系在与土体界面的相互作用方面存在差异,实际根系与土壤接触处由于生物化学作用提高土体的黏聚力。因此在实际护坡应用时,在坡面把植筋带周围土体压密实防止降雨优势流的发生,同时考虑减少降雨沿着竖向植筋带与土体之间界面入渗的工程措施。
3. 结论
（1）根系加筋能增加土体的力学强度,随着根系顺剪切方向的倾角增加,根系断裂时所产生的拉伸变形量增加,根系断裂时的剪切位移越小,根系固土效果增强,根-土复合体抗剪强度提高。
（2）竖向植筋带能显著增加土体的抗剪强度,其它条件一定时,界面抗剪强度随土体含水率增大而减小,依次为
τ0%>τ5%>τ10% ；竖向植筋带数量增加可显著增加抗剪强度值。（3）试验结果表明,竖向植筋带可以帮助灌乔木植株增加根系长度（相当于延长根）,解决植物根系短于降雨影响深度和力学加筋不足而不能有效防护坡土的问题,拓展植物护坡的工程应用。
（4）竖向植筋带湿润会显著降低界面黏聚力与内摩擦角的值,这也说明了竖向植筋带-土体界面特性的重要性。在实际护坡应用时,在坡面把植筋带周围土体压密实防止降雨优势流的发生,同时考虑减少降雨沿着竖向植筋带与土体之间界面入渗的工程措施。
-
![]()
图 1 脲酶菌诱导矿化反应过程概述
Figure 1. Overview of biomineralization process induced by ureolytic bacteria
![]()
![]()
图 3 多孔介质中细菌传输、微生物矿化沉积及微生物加固土破坏模式示意图
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of bacterial transport, microbial-mineralization precipitation and failure patterns in biocemented soil
![]()
-
[1] BUI M, ADJIMAN C S, BARDOW A, et al. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward[J]. Energy & Environmental Science, 2018, 11(5): 1062-1176.
[2] XIAO Y, HE X, ZAMAN M, et al. Review of strength improvements of biocemented soils[J]. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2022, 22(11): 03122001. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0002565
[3] MA G, HE X, JIANG X, et al. Strength and permeability of bentonite-assisted biocemented coarse sand[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2021, 58(7): 969-981. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2020-0045
[4] WU C, CHU J, WU S, et al. Quantifying the permeability reduction of biogrouted rock fracture[J]. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 2019, 52(3): 947-954. doi: 10.1007/s00603-018-1669-9
[5] TOBLER D J, MINTO J M, EL MOUNTASSIR G, et al. Microscale analysis of fractured rock sealed with microbially induced CaCO3 precipitation: influence on hydraulic and mechanical performance[J]. Water Resources Research, 2018, 54(10): 8295-8308. doi: 10.1029/2018WR023032
[6] SONG M, JU T, MENG Y, et al. A review on the applications of microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation in solid waste treatment and soil remediation[J]. Chemosphere, 2022, 290: 133229. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133229
[7] WANG Y, SOGA K, DEJONG J T, et al. A microfluidic chip and its use in characterising the particle-scale behaviour of microbial-induced calcium carbonate precipitation (MICP)[J]. Géotechnique, 2019, 69(12): 1086-1094. doi: 10.1680/jgeot.18.P.031
[8] 何想, 马国梁, 汪杨, 等. 基于微流控芯片技术的微生物加固可视化研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2020, 42(6): 1005-1012. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202006003 HE Xiang, MA Guoliang, WANG Yang, et al. Visualization investigation of bio-cementation process based on microfluidics[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2020, 42(6): 1005-1012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202006003
[9] XIAO Y, HE X, EVANS T M, et al. Unconfined compressive and splitting tensile strength of basalt fiber–reinforced biocemented sand[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2019, 145(9): 04019048. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002108
[10] 马国梁, 何想, 路桦铭, 等. 高岭土微粒固载成核微生物固化粗砂强度[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2021, 43(2): 290-299. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202102009 MA Guoliang, HE Xiang, LU Huaming, et al. Strength of biocemented coarse sand with Kaolin micro-particle improved nucleation[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2021, 43(2): 290-299. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202102009
[11] NASSAR M K, GURUNG D, BASTANI M, et al. Large-scale experiments in microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP): Reactive transport model development and prediction[J]. Water Resources Research, 2018, 54(1): 480-500. doi: 10.1002/2017WR021488
[12] ZENG C, VEENIS Y, HALL C A, et al. Experimental and numerical analysis of a field trial application of microbially induced calcite precipitation for ground stabilization[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2021, 147(7): 05021003. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002545
[13] BACHMEIER K L, WILLIAMS A E, WARMINGTON J R, et al. Urease activity in microbiologically-induced calcite precipitation[J]. J Biotechnol, 2002, 93(2): 171-181. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1656(01)00393-5
[14] MARTIN D, DODDS K, NGWENYA B T, et al. Inhibition of Sporosarcina pasteurii under anoxic conditions: implications for subsurface carbonate precipitation and remediation via ureolysis[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2012, 46(15): 8351-8355. doi: 10.1021/es3015875
[15] BLAKELEY ROBERT L, BURT Z. Jack bean urease: the first nickel enzyme[J]. Journal of Molecular Catalysis, 1984, 23(2/3): 263-292.
[16] 刘汉龙, 肖鹏, 肖杨, 等. 微生物岩土技术及其应用研究新进展[J]. 土木与环境工程学报(中英文), 2019(1): 1-14. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JIAN201901001.htm LIU Hanlong, XIAO Peng, XIAO Yang, et al. State-of-the-art review of biogeotechnology and its engineering applications[J]. Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2019(1): 1-14. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JIAN201901001.htm
[17] WHIFFIN V S. Microbial CaCO3 precipitation for the production of biocement[D]. Perth West Australia: Morduch University, 2004.
[18] PAASSEN L van. Biogrout ground improvement by microbially induced carbonate precipitation[D]. Rijswijk Netherland: Delft University of Technology, 2009.
[19] HAMMES F, VERSTRAETE W. Key roles of pH and calcium metabolism in microbial carbonate precipitation[J]. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 2002, 1(1): 3-7. doi: 10.1023/A:1015135629155
[20] MARVASI M, VISSCHER P T, PERITO B, et al. Physiological requirements for carbonate precipitation during biofilm development of Bacillus subtilis etfA mutant[J]. FEMS Microbiol Ecol, 2010, 71(3): 341-350. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2009.00805.x
[21] MITCHELL A C, FERRIS F G. The influence of Bacillus pasteuriion the nucleation and growth of calcium carbonate[J]. Geomicrobiology Journal, 2006, 23(3/4): 213-226.
[22] ZHANG W, JU Y, ZONG Y, et al. In situ real-time study on dynamics of microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation at a single-cell level[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2018, 52(16): 9266-9276. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b02660
[23] RUI Y, QIAN C. Characteristics of different bacteria and their induced biominerals[J]. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2022, 115: 449-465. doi: 10.1016/j.jiec.2022.08.032
[24] NIU Y-Q, LIU J-H, AYMONIER C, et al. Calcium carbonate: controlled synthesis, surface functionalization, and nanostructured materials[J]. Chemical Society Reviews, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2022, 51(18): 7883-7943. doi: 10.1039/D1CS00519G
[25] CHEN Y Q, WANG S Q, TONG X Y, et al. Crystal transformation and self-assembly theory of microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation[J]. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 2022, 106(9/10): 3555-3569.
[26] WANG Y, SOGA K, DEJONG J T, et al. Effects of bacterial density on growth rate and characteristics of microbial-induced CaCO3 precipitates: Particle-scale experimental study[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2021, 147(6): 04021036. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002509
[27] WANG Y, SOGA K, DEJONG J T, et al. Microscale visualization of microbial-induced calcium carbonate precipitation processes[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2019, 145(9): 04019045. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002079
[28] ZEHNER J, RØYNE A, WENTZEL A, et al. Microbial-induced calcium carbonate precipitation: an experimental toolbox for in situ and real time investigation of micro-scale pH evolution[J]. RSC Advances, 2020, 10(35): 20485-20493. doi: 10.1039/D0RA03897K
[29] 何想, 刘汉龙, 韩飞, 等. 微生物矿化沉积时空演化的微流控芯片试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2021, 43(10): 1861-1869. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202110012 HE Xiang, LIU Hanlong, HAN Fei, et al. Spatiotemporal evolution of microbial-induced calcium carbonate precipitation based on microfluidics[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2021, 43(10): 1861-1869. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202110012
[30] XIAO Y, HE X, WU W, et al. Kinetic biomineralization through microfluidic chip tests[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2021, 16(10): 3229-3237. doi: 10.1007/s11440-021-01205-w
[31] ZHU X, WANG K, YAN H, et al. Microfluidics as an emerging platform for exploring soil environmental processes: a critical review[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2022, 56(2): 711-731. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.1c03899
[32] WEINHARDT F, CLASS H, VAHID DASTJERDI S, et al. Experimental methods and imaging for enzymatically induced calcite precipitation in a microfluidic cell[J]. Water Resources Research, 2021, 57(3): e2020WR029361. doi: 10.1029/2020WR029361
[33] WEINHARDT F, DENG J, HOMMEL J, et al. Spatiotemporal distribution of precipitates and mineral phase transition during biomineralization affect porosity-permeability relationships[J]. Transport in Porous Media, 2022, 143(2): 527-549. doi: 10.1007/s11242-022-01782-8
[34] XIAO Y, HE X, STUEDLEIN A W, et al. Crystal growth of MICP through microfluidic chip tests[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2022, 148(5): 06022002. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002756
[35] ELMALOGLOU A, TERZIS D, DE ANNA P, et al. Microfluidic study in a meter-long reactive path reveals how the medium's structural heterogeneity shapes MICP-induced biocementation[J]. Sci Rep, 2022, 12(1): 19553. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-24124-6
[36] DEJONG J T, MORTENSEN B M, MARTINEZ B C, et al. Bio-mediated soil improvement[J]. Ecological Engineering, 2010, 36(2): 197-210. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.12.029
[37] DADDA A, GEINDREAU C, EMERIAULT F, et al. Characterization of contact properties in biocemented sand using 3D X-ray micro-tomography[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2019, 14(3): 597-613. doi: 10.1007/s11440-018-0744-4
[38] YANG Y, CHU J, LIU H, et al. Improvement of uniformity of biocemented sand column using CH3COOH-buffered one-phase-low-pH injection method[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2023, 18(1): 413-428. doi: 10.1007/s11440-022-01576-8
[39] 何稼, 楚剑, 刘汉龙, 等. 微生物岩土技术的研究进展[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2016, 38(4): 643-653. doi: 10.11779/CJGE201604008 HE Jia, CHU Jian, LIU Hanlong, et al. Research advances in biogeotechnologies[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2016, 38(4): 643-653. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE201604008
[40] ERYÜRÜK K. Effect of cell density on decrease in hydraulic conductivity by microbial calcite precipitation[J]. AMB Express, 2022, 12(1): 104. doi: 10.1186/s13568-022-01448-0
[41] WU C, CHU J, WU S, et al. 3D characterization of microbially induced carbonate precipitation in rock fracture and the resulted permeability reduction[J]. Engineering Geology, 2019, 249: 23-30. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.12.017
[42] MOUNTASSIR G E, LUNN R J, MOIR H, et al. Hydrodynamic coupling in microbially mediated fracture mineralization: Formation of self-organized groundwater flow channels[J]. Water Resources Research, 2014, 50(1): 1-16. doi: 10.1002/2013WR013578
[43] MINTO J M, HINGERL F F, BENSON S M, et al. X-ray CT and multiphase flow characterization of a 'bio-grouted' sandstone core: The effect of dissolution on seal longevity[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2017, 64: 152-162. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.07.007
[44] XIAO Y, CHEN H, STUEDLEIN A W, et al. Restraint of particle breakage by biotreatment method[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2020, 146(11): 04020123. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002384
[45] XIAO Y, ZHAO C, SUN Y, et al. Compression behavior of MICP-treated sand with various gradations[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2021, 16(5): 1391-1400. doi: 10.1007/s11440-020-01116-2
[46] MA G, XIAO Y, FAN W, et al. Mechanical properties of biocement formed by microbially induced carbonate precipitation[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2022, 17(11): 4905-4919. doi: 10.1007/s11440-022-01584-8
[47] GAO K, LIN H, SULEIMAN M T, et al. Shear and tensile strength measurements of CaCO3 cemented bonds between glass beads treated by microbially induced carbonate precipitation[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2023, 149(1): 04022117. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002927
[48] DEJONG J T, FRITZGES M B, NÜSSLEIN K. Microbially induced cementation to control sand response to undrained shear[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2006, 132(11): 1381-1392. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:11(1381)
[49] YIN J, WU J-X, ZHANG K, et al. Comparison between MICP-based bio-cementation versus traditional portland cementation for oil-contaminated soil stabilisation[J]. Sustainability, 2023, 15(1): 434.
[50] TAGLIAFERRI F, WALLER J, ANDÒ E, et al. Observing strain localisation processes in bio-cemented sand using X-ray imaging[J]. Granular Matter, 2011, 13(3): 247-250. doi: 10.1007/s10035-011-0257-4
[51] O'DONNELL S T, KAVAZANJIAN E. Stiffness and dilatancy improvements in uncemented sands treated through MICP[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2015, 141(11): 2815004. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001407
[52] 崔昊, 肖杨, 孙增春, 等. 微生物加固砂土弹塑性本构模型[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2022, 44(3): 474-482. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202203009 CUI Hao, XIAO Yang, SUN Zengchun, et al. Elastoplastic constitutive model for biocemented sands[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2022, 44(3): 474-482. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202203009
[53] XIAO P, LIU H, XIAO Y, et al. Liquefaction resistance of bio-cemented calcareous sand[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2018, 107: 9-19. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.01.008
[54] XIAO P, LIU H, STUEDLEIN A W, et al. Effect of relative density and biocementation on cyclic response of calcareous sand[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2019, 56(12): 1849-1862. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2018-0573
[55] 肖鹏, 刘汉龙, 张宇, 等. 微生物温控加固钙质砂动强度特性研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2021, 43(3): 511-519. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202103014 XIAO Peng, LIU Hanlong, ZHANG Yu, et al. Dynamic strength of temperature-controlled MICP-treated calcareous sand[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2021, 43(3): 511-519. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202103014
[56] ZAMANI A, MONTOYA B M. Undrained cyclic response of silty sands improved by microbial induced calcium carbonate precipitation[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2019, 120: 436-448. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.01.010
[57] RIVEROS G A, SADREKARIMI A. Liquefaction resistance of Fraser River sand improved by a microbially-induced cementation[J]. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2020, 131: 106034. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106034
[58] MINTO J M, LUNN R J, EL MOUNTASSIR G. Development of a reactive transport model for field-scale simulation of microbially induced carbonate precipitation[J]. Water Resources Research, 2019, 55(8): 7229-7245. doi: 10.1029/2019WR025153
[59] ZHONG H, LIU G, JIANG Y, et al. Transport of bacteria in porous media and its enhancement by surfactants for bioaugmentation: a review[J]. Biotechnol Adv, 2017, 35(4): 490-504. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.03.009
[60] EBIGBO A, PHILLIPS A, GERLACH R, et al. Darcy-scale modeling of microbially induced carbonate mineral precipitation in sand columns[J]. Water Resources Research, 2012, 48(7): W07519.
[61] 赵常, 何想, 胡冉, 等. 微生物矿化动力学理论与模拟[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2022, 44(6): 1096-1105, I0006. doi: 10.11779/CJGE202206014 ZHAO Chang, HE Xiang, HU Ran, et al. Kinetic theory and numerical simulation of biomineralization[J]. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2022, 44(6): 1096-1105, I0006. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11779/CJGE202206014
[62] QIN C, HASSANIZADEH S M, EBIGBO A. Pore-scale network modeling of microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation: Insight into scale dependence of biogeochemical reaction rates[J]. Water Resources Research, 2016, 52(11): 8794-8810. doi: 10.1002/2016WR019128
[63] FUJITA Y, TAYLOR J L, GRESHAM T L, et al. Stimulation of microbial urea hydrolysis in groundwater to enhance calcite precipitation[J]. Environ Sci Technol, 2008, 42(8): 3025-3032. doi: 10.1021/es702643g
[64] MFidaleo, Rlavecchia. Kinetic study of enzymatic urea hydrolysis in the pH range 4-9[J]. Chemical and Biochemical Engineering Quarterly, 2003, 17(4): 311-318.
[65] LAUCHNOR E G, TOPP D M, PARKER A E, et al. Whole cell kinetics of ureolysis by sporosarcina pasteurii[J]. J Appl Microbiol, 2015, 118(6): 1321-1332. doi: 10.1111/jam.12804
[66] WANG X, NACKENHORST U. A coupled bio-chemo-hydraulic model to predict porosity and permeability reduction during microbially induced calcite precipitation[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 2020, 140: 103563. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103563
[67] NISHIMURA I, MATSUBARA H. Coupling simulation of microbially induced carbonate precipitation and bacterial growth using reaction-diffusion and homogenisation systems[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2021, 16(5): 1-16.
[68] FAURIEL S, LALOUI L. A bio-chemo-hydro-mechanical model for microbially induced calcite precipitation in soils[J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 2012, 46: 104-120. doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.05.017
[69] MEHRABI R, ATEFI-MONFARED K. A coupled bio-chemo-hydro-mechanical model for bio-cementation in porous media[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2022, 59(7): 1266-1280. doi: 10.1139/cgj-2021-0396
[70] WANG X, NACKENHORST U. Micro-feature-motivated numerical analysis of the coupled bio-chemo-hydro-mechanical behaviour in MICP[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2022, 17(10): 4537-4553. doi: 10.1007/s11440-022-01544-2
[71] SUEBSUK J, HORPIBULSUK S, LIU M D. Modified Structured Cam Clay: a generalised critical state model for destructured, naturally structured and artificially structured clays[J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 2010, 37(7): 956-968.
[72] GAI X, SÁNCHEZ M. An elastoplastic mechanical constitutive model for microbially mediated cemented soils[J]. Acta Geotechnica, 2019, 14(3): 709-726. doi: 10.1007/s11440-018-0721-y
[73] GAJO A, CECINATO F, HUECKEL T. Chemo-mechanical modelling of cemented soils, from the microscale to the volume element[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2016, 158: 15-20. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.398
[74] 方祥位, 李晶鑫, 李捷, 等. 珊瑚砂微生物固化体三轴压缩试验及损伤本构模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(增刊1): 1-8. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX2018S1002.htm FANG Xiangwei, LI Jinxin, LI Jie, et al. Study of triaxial compression test and damage constitutive model of biocemented coral sand columns[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2018, 39(S1): 1-8. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YTLX2018S1002.htm
[75] 李贤. 微生物灌浆固化紫色土的水力-力学特性及其强化机理研究[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2020. LI Xian. Study on Hydraulic-Mechanical Properties and Strengthening Mechanism of Purple Soil Solidified by Microbial Grouting[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2020. (in Chinese)
[76] XIAO Y, ZHANG Z, STUEDLEIN A W, et al. Liquefaction modeling for biocemented calcareous sand[J]. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2021, 147(12): 04021149. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002666
[77] XIN A, DU H, YU K, et al. Mechanics of bacteria-assisted extrinsic healing[J]. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 2020, 139: 103938. doi: 10.1016/j.jmps.2020.103938
[78] WU H W, WU W, LIANG W J, et al. 3D DEM modeling of biocemented sand with fines as cementing agents[J]. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2023, 47: 212-240. doi: 10.1002/nag.3466
[79] YANG P, KAVAZANJIAN E, NEITHALATH N. Particle-scale mechanisms in undrained triaxial compression of biocemented sands: Insights from 3D DEM simulations with flexible boundary[J]. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2019, 19(4): 04019009. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001346
[80] XIAO Y, XIAO W-T, WU H-R, et al. Fracture of interparticle MICP bonds under compression[J]. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2023, 23(3): 04022316. doi: 10.1061/IJGNAI.GMENG-8282
-
期刊类型引用(18)
1. 姚怡宁，宗桦，周璐，李荷，冯旭环. 川西大渡河干热河谷优势灌草植物根系特征及固土能力. 生态学报. 2025(06): 2798-2810 . 
百度学术
2. 王铁行，赵翊豪，金鑫. 喷射秸秆加筋黄土的强度特性研究. 地下空间与工程学报. 2024(03): 800-811 . 百度学术
3. 陈婧逸，陈晓清，宋东日，吕明，蒋豪. 灌木根系形态对土体强度影响的大型直剪试验研究. 长江科学院院报. 2024(08): 120-127+163 . 百度学术
4. 程虎，李蒙，杨劭，张乃畅，李厚峰. 水陆交错带护坡植物固土抗蚀能力比较分析. 中国水土保持科学(中英文). 2024(03): 56-63 . 百度学术
5. 谭瑞琪，谢亚军，李欣然，姜宝莹，张桂荣. 植被防护岸坡加筋机理研究. 中国水运. 2023(06): 71-74 . 百度学术
6. 陈飞，谢蕴忠，王俊峰，张仕彬. 基于数值模拟方法的根系护坡研究进展. 科学技术与工程. 2023(16): 6728-6738 . 百度学术
7. 梅红，马柯，刘瑾，王禄艺，冯玉晗，齐梦瑶，胡梦园. 生态型稳定剂协同植物根系固土特性及机理研究. 水利水电科技进展. 2023(04): 52-58 . 百度学术
8. 蒋冬卫. 不同地区沿海港口物流业发展现状评价分析. 中国水运. 2023(11): 74-76 . 百度学术
9. 杜技能，王中珏，段继琪，王忠良，段青松. 生态护坡理论及技术研究现状综述. 水利与建筑工程学报. 2023(06): 211-220 . 百度学术
10. 徐华，袁海莉，王歆宇，王栋，陈建勋，荣才权. 根系形态和层次结构对根土复合体力学特性影响研究. 岩土工程学报. 2022(05): 926-935 . 本站查看
11. 杨家庆，鲁明星，吴冠辰，袁雪涛，李富平，许永利，李小光. 矿山边坡植被修复研究现状及发展趋势分析. 矿山测量. 2022(01): 83-87 . 百度学术
12. 穆奎，潘伟良，王利彬，李婷，陈雅雯，丁奠元. 生态河道植物护坡工程技术研究现状与展望. 水利与建筑工程学报. 2022(03): 206-216 . 百度学术
13. 毕银丽，罗睿，王双明. 接菌对紫花苜蓿根系抗拉性及根菌复合土体抗剪强度影响. 煤炭学报. 2022(06): 2182-2192 . 百度学术
14. 黄琛，张友谊，叶小兵. 基于SEEP/W的强震区根系土坡面物源失稳机制分析. 科技通报. 2022(07): 57-66+72 . 百度学术
15. 李杰. 河道整治中根系植被特征对岸坡改良土影响试验研究. 水利技术监督. 2022(10): 129-132+177 . 百度学术
16. 梅红，胡国长，王禄艺，梅绪哲，刘瑾，徐佳俊，杨欣雅，杨诺. 边坡植被固土抗冲刷特性及其护坡机理研究. 河北工程大学学报(自然科学版). 2022(04): 86-91 . 百度学术
17. 姜彤，李龙飞，薛雷，黄坤，丁昊，王昊宇. 乔木护坡效果物理模型试验研究. 科学技术与工程. 2022(35): 15546-15553 . 百度学术
18. 陈飞，施康，钱乾，罗特. 根土复合体材料的抗剪强度特性研究进展. 有色金属科学与工程. 2021(06): 96-104 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(20)
-
其他相关附件
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数: 0
- HTML全文浏览量: 0
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 38
