| ATCC 51195| DSM 9895| Rhodospirillum sodomense| Rhodospirillum sodomense Mack et al. 1996| Rhodovibrio sodomensis| Rhodovibrio sodomensis (Mack et al. 1996) Imhoff et al. 1998| strain DS1| strain DSI
Water quality: Rhodovibrio sodomensis and other bacteria in the Rhodobacteraceae family contribute to microbial communities in aquatic ecosystems. While they are not typically associated with waterborne diseases, changes in the abundance or activity of these bacteria could potentially affect water quality parameters such as nutrient cycling, organic matter decomposition, and the production of metabolites or secondary compounds that may indirectly impact human health.
Ecological interactions: Rhodovibrio sodomensis interacts with other organisms in aquatic ecosystems, including algae, protozoa, and higher organisms. These interactions can influence ecosystem dynamics, including nutrient cycling, food web structure, and the production of bioactive compounds. While the ecological impacts of Rhodovibrio sodomensis are primarily of interest from an environmental perspective, changes in ecosystem functioning could indirectly affect human well-being, such as through alterations in fisheries, recreational activities, or ecosystem services.
Biotechnological applications: Some species within the genus Rhodovibrio, including Rhodovibrio sodomensis, have been studied for their potential biotechnological applications, such as in wastewater treatment, bioremediation, and bioenergy production. While these applications are primarily focused on environmental or industrial processes rather than direct human health impacts, they highlight the diverse metabolic capabilities and potential practical uses of phototrophic bacteria like Rhodovibrio sodomensis.
A lot more information is available when you are logged in and raise the display level
Other Sources for more information:
![]() |
NCBI | Data Punk | End Products Produced |
Different labs use different software to read the sample. See this post for more details.
One lab may say you have none, another may say you have a lot! - This may be solely due to the software they are using to estimate.
We deem lab specific values using values from the KM method for each specific lab to be the most reliable.
Lab | Frequency | UD-Low | UD-High | KM Low | KM High | Lab Low | Lab High | Mean | Median | Standard Deviation | Box Plot Low | Box Plot High | KM Percentile Low | KM Percentile High |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Other Labs | 22.02 | 0 | 20 | 10 | 770 | 0 | 446 | 114.6 | 50 | 169.2 | 0 | 210 | 0 %ile | 99.2 %ile |
biomesight | 18.99 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 1280 | 0 | 460 | 118.6 | 50 | 174.1 | 0 | 210 | 0 %ile | 99.8 %ile |
Source of Ranges | Low Boundary | High Boundary | Low Boundary %age | High Boundary %age |
---|
Lab | Frequency Seen | Average | Standard Deviation | Sample Count | Lab Samples |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
BiomeSight | 20.352 % | 0.011 % | 0.016 % | 947.0 | 4653 |
|
And display level must be raised above public.