The next transformation in human civilization is occurring in the energy sector. The transition is supported mostly by concern for environmental safety (climate change). Other factors such as energy security and economics also dictate the shift. The transition will be more disruptive to oil-exporting economies such as Nigeria, which depend heavily on it for economic growth. Historical inferences from past energy transitions reveals that discovery and massive acceleration of new energy resources alters mode of production, energy consumption, economic innovation and unlocks multiplier effects on the society. Technology and availability of energy resources is the critical enabler of past transitions. Renewable energy technologies are becoming more cost-competitive relative to fossil fuels. The increasing transition will have serious socioeconomic and political implications, if the country does not diversify its economy. For example, contraction in oil export because of global transition to renewable energy will reduce Nigeria government's revenue, increase unemployment, decrease capacity to finance infrastructure and development projects, and increase poverty rate. Nigeria has enormous renewable energy potential—solar, wind, biomass, etc. The use of renewables will improve environmental quality. For example, increased use of biomass (organic wastes) for energy production will advance Nigeria solid waste management system and vice versa. All these are associated with sustainable resource management.
Citation: Chukwuebuka Okafor, Christian Madu, Charles Ajaero, Juliet Ibekwe, Happy Bebenimibo, Chinelo Nzekwe. Moving beyond fossil fuel in an oil-exporting and emerging economy: Paradigm shift[J]. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(2): 379-413. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021020
| [1] | Prateebha Ramroop, Hudaa Neetoo . Antilisterial activity of Cymbopogon citratus on crabsticks. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(1): 67-84. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.1.67 |
| [2] | Afraa Said Al-Adawi, Christine C. Gaylarde, Jan Sunner, Iwona B. Beech . Transfer of bacteria between stainless steel and chicken meat: A CLSM and DGGE study of biofilms. AIMS Microbiology, 2016, 2(3): 340-358. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.3.340 |
| [3] | John Samelis, Athanasia Kakouri . Hurdle factors minimizing growth of Listeria monocytogenes while counteracting in situ antilisterial effects of a novel nisin A-producing Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris costarter in thermized cheese milks. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(1): 19-41. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.1.19 |
| [4] | Elena Kotenkova, Dagmara Bataeva, Mikhail Minaev, Elena Zaiko . Application of EvaGreen for the assessment of Listeria monocytogenes АТСС 13932 cell viability using flow cytometry. AIMS Microbiology, 2019, 5(1): 39-47. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2019.1.39 |
| [5] | Thomas Bintsis . Foodborne pathogens. AIMS Microbiology, 2017, 3(3): 529-563. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2017.3.529 |
| [6] | Agni Hadjilouka, Konstantinos Nikolidakis, Spiros Paramithiotis, Eleftherios H. Drosinos . Effect of co-culture with enterocinogenic E. faecium on L. monocytogenes key virulence gene expression. AIMS Microbiology, 2016, 2(3): 359-371. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.3.359 |
| [7] | Stephen H. Kasper, Ryan Hart, Magnus Bergkvist, Rabi A. Musah, Nathaniel C. Cady . Zein nanocapsules as a tool for surface passivation, drug delivery and biofilm prevention. AIMS Microbiology, 2016, 2(4): 422-433. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.4.422 |
| [8] | Tatyana V. Polyudova, Daria V. Eroshenko, Vladimir P. Korobov . Plasma, serum, albumin, and divalent metal ions inhibit the adhesion and the biofilm formation of Cutibacterium (Propionibacterium) acnes. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(1): 165-172. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.1.165 |
| [9] | Itziar Chapartegui-González, María Lázaro-Díez, Santiago Redondo-Salvo, Elena Amaro-Prellezo, Estefanía Esteban-Rodríguez, José Ramos-Vivas . Biofilm formation in Hafnia alvei HUMV-5920, a human isolate. AIMS Microbiology, 2016, 2(4): 412-421. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2016.4.412 |
| [10] | Joseph O. Falkinham . Mycobacterium avium complex: Adherence as a way of life. AIMS Microbiology, 2018, 4(3): 428-438. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2018.3.428 |
The next transformation in human civilization is occurring in the energy sector. The transition is supported mostly by concern for environmental safety (climate change). Other factors such as energy security and economics also dictate the shift. The transition will be more disruptive to oil-exporting economies such as Nigeria, which depend heavily on it for economic growth. Historical inferences from past energy transitions reveals that discovery and massive acceleration of new energy resources alters mode of production, energy consumption, economic innovation and unlocks multiplier effects on the society. Technology and availability of energy resources is the critical enabler of past transitions. Renewable energy technologies are becoming more cost-competitive relative to fossil fuels. The increasing transition will have serious socioeconomic and political implications, if the country does not diversify its economy. For example, contraction in oil export because of global transition to renewable energy will reduce Nigeria government's revenue, increase unemployment, decrease capacity to finance infrastructure and development projects, and increase poverty rate. Nigeria has enormous renewable energy potential—solar, wind, biomass, etc. The use of renewables will improve environmental quality. For example, increased use of biomass (organic wastes) for energy production will advance Nigeria solid waste management system and vice versa. All these are associated with sustainable resource management.
Biofilms are living microbial communities attached to a solid surface or flowing in aqueous systems. Mature biofilms are highly organized ecosystems in which microbial cells are embedded in extracellular matrices with water channels that provide passages for the exchange of nutrients, metabolites and waste products [1]. Such biofilm structures can confer protection to bacterial cells and decrease the efficiency of cleaning and disinfection procedures [2]. Multispecies biofilms are the predominant forms of presence for microorganisms in the natural environments, and play important roles in the survival and persistence of microorganisms, including foodborne pathogens [3]. In such microbial communities, microorganisms interact in various ways that can be described as competition, antagonism, or synergism [4].
Listeria monocytogenes is a Gram-positive foodborne pathogen that is responsible for serious infections in immunocompromised individuals and pregnant women [5]. It is frequently found in various food processing environments and has been isolated from a range of food products including meat, milk, cheese, and vegetables [6,7,8,9]. Over the last few decades, L. monocytogenes continued to be a major public health threat [10]. A recent large scale outbreak was caused by contaminated cantaloupes grown and packed in one farm in Colorado which caused 147 infections and at least 33 deaths in the USA [11]. Biofilm formation has been suggested an important factor for the persistence of L. monocytogenes in the environment and the contaminations of food processing facilities. However, L. monocytogenes cultivated alone in classic laboratory media, such as tryptone soy broth (TSB) or brain-heart infusion (BHI) broth, exhibit relatively low potential for forming biofilm [12,13].
Ralstonia insidiosa is a Gram-negative, nonsporulating, aerobic, nonfermentative, motile rod. It has been isolated from the respiratory secretions of cystic fibrosis patients, river and pond water, soil, activated sludge [14] and has also been detected in water distribution systems [15]. R. insidiosa FC 1138 was isolated from a fresh-cut produce processing plant and has been shown a strong biofilm producer. When co-cultured with R. insidiosa, the presence E. coli O157:H7 in the biofilms significantly increase under various tested conditions [16]. In this study we evaluated the interactions of L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa in biofilm formation during 24 h co-incubation. At this time period, although the biofilm is still considered in early stage, the interspecies interactions can be readily discerned.
L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa strains (Table 1) originally isolated from various food and other sources were from our laboratory collections. They were maintained at –80 ℃ in TSB (BD, Franklin Lakes, NJ) with 25% glycerol. Before all experiments, frozen cells were subcultured on tryptic soy agar plates (TSA; BD) for 24 h, and then one colony was transferred into TSB and grown to stationary phase. L. monocytogenes strain FS2025 was used as a representative in experiments of biofilm formation on stainless steel surface and in compartmentalized cultures.
| Strain | Serotype | Isolation Source | Collections |
| R. insidiosa | |||
| FC1138 | NA | Fresh produce facility | EMFSL |
| L. monocytogenes | |||
| FS2005 | 1/2a | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2006 | 3b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2007 | 1/2b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2008 | 4b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2009 | 4b | Spinal fluid of child with meningitis | ATCC |
| FS2017 | 4b | Beef and pork sausage | EMFSL |
| FS2018 | 1/2b | Hard salami | EMFSL |
| FS2019 | 1/2a | Frankfurter | EMFSL |
| FS2025 | 1/2b | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| FS2026 | 1/2a | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| EMFSL: Environmental Microbial and Food Safety Laboratory, USDA ARS; ATCC: American Type Culture Collections; NRRL: Northern Regional Research Laboratory, USDA ARS. | |||
DownLoad: CSVA static biofilm formation assay was performed in 96-well polystyrene plates (BD) as previously reported [17] with some modifications. Briefly, cells were cultured overnight in TSB. They were centrifuged at 4,500 g and re-suspended in 10% TSB. The OD600 value was adjusted to 0.5 and then diluted 100 fold in 10% TSB. Aliquots of 200 μL of this inoculated culture, containing either a single strain or a mixture of R. insidiosa and L. monocytogenes, were transferred to individual wells for biofilm formation. The plates were incubated at 30 ℃ for 24 h without shaking. After removal of the liquid culture, attached biofilms were stained with crystal violet. Excessive dye was removed and rinsed three times with PBS. The retained dye was dissolved in 33% acetic acid, and absorbance was measured at 570 nm to quantify total biomass.
Cell culture plates (12-well) and matching insert compartments with 0.4 μm pore size polycarbonate membrane (Corning, NY, USA) that supported free diffusion of culture medium and metabolites were used to physically separate R. insidiosa and L. monocytogenes strains during biofilm formation. A bacterial suspension (1.5 ml in 10% TSB) of L. monocytogenes strain was added to each well of the plate, and an equal volume of the same medium with or without inoculum of R. insidiosa was added in the insert compartment on top of the wells. After incubation at 30 ℃ for 24 h, the inserts were removed. Biofilms in the base compartments were determined by crystal violet stain. A reciprocal format with L. monocytogenes in the insert compartment was similarly tested.
Type 304 stainless steel coupons with #4 brush finishing (30 mm × 15 mm × 2 mm, Remaly Manufacturing, Tamaqua, PA) were used for biofilm formation. Coupons were placed in a sterile deep-well micro-dilution block with 2 ml of bacteria suspension in each well, which allows the submersion of half of the coupon. They were incubated at 30 ℃ for 24 h without shaking. Then the coupons were washed three times with PBS and fixed with formaldehyde for 1 h. Biofilms structures were observed using a Hitachi S-4700 low temperature scanning electron microscope (Hitachi High Technologies America, Inc., Schaumburg, IL) after coating with platinum.
Enumeration of bacteria in biofilms formed on stainless steel coupons (75 mm × 25 mm × 2 mm, Remaly Manufacturing) was carried out as follows: The coupon was half submerged in 20 ml growth medium in a 50 ml Falcon tube and allowed static incubation at 30 ℃ for 24 h. The coupons were rinsed three times with 3 ml of sterile PBS. Cells remaining attached to the coupon surface were harvested by uni-directional scraping with a sterile cotton-headed stick and released into 10 ml sterile PBS by rigorous twirling and squeezing against vial side. The resulted samples were then vortexed vigorously for 1 min to facilitate cell dispersion. Cell suspension was 10-fold serially diluted and plated on TSA containing 1 g/L of 5-Bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl β-D-glucopyranoside for enumerating L. monocytogenes (blue colonies) and R. insidiosa (white colonies).
A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed for statistical analysis using the SPSS software version 19.0. Data were presented as the mean values ± SD (n = 3). Differences were considered significant when P < 0.05.
Biofilm formation by 10 L. monocytogenes strains of varying serotypes and isolation origins were examined as monoculture and in mixed culture with R. insidiosa strain FC1138 (Figure 1). When cultured alone, each of the L. monocytogenes strains exhibited weak ability of biofilm formation in 10% TSB, as indicated by the minimal biomass accumulation. No difference was observed among the tested L. monocytogenes strains. Previous studies by Harvey et al [12] showed that L. monocytogenes strains had varying biofilm formations, although the majority was weak biofilm producers. This was also consistent with observations in our previous study [18] which showed that all L. monocytogenes strains tested were weak in biofilm formation in monocultures. In contrast, biomass accumulation in the mixed cultures of R. insidiosa with individual L. monocytogenes strains was significantly higher, indicating strong biofilm formation. Since R. insidiosa alone is a strong biofilm former, it could be expected that the high biomass accumulation was due to the strong biofilm formation by R. insidiosa. However, the biomass accumulation in the mixed culture greatly exceeded the sum of the two individual strains, indicating a synergistic interaction between L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa in forming biofilms. This synergistic interaction was also previously observed between R. insidiosa and E. coli O157:H7 strain [18].
Figure 1. Biofilm formation of L. monocytogenes strains in monocultures and in mixed cultures with R. insidiosa measured by the crystal violet staining assay.Quorum sensing is a common mechanism of intra-and inter-species communications in microbial communities. This mechanism relies on small diffusible molecules, such as acy-homoserine lactone (AHL), oligopeptides, and autoinducer 2, as signal molecules [19]. To examine the possibility that the synergistic interaction in biofilm formation was affected by a mechanism akin to quorum sensing, R. insidiosa and L. monocytogenes cells were inoculated in two separate compartments linked through 0.4 µm pore size filter membrane that supported free diffusion of culture medium and metabolites. Biomass production were determined (Figure 2) after incubation at 30 ℃ for 24 h. No significant difference was observed in the L. monocytogenes monoculture biofilms formed with or without the presence of R. insidiosa in a semi-permeable membrane-linked compartment. This observation does not support the notion that R. insidiosa metabolites or secreted signal molecules play significant roles in promoting the incorporation of listeria strains into dual species biofilms. In a reciprocal setting, R. insidiosa biofilm formation was not affected by the presence of L. monocytogenes in a connected semipermeable compartment. We also examined the biofilm formation of L. monocytogenes in the presence or absence of potential R. insidiosa diffusible signal molecules by supernatant replacement. Replacing supernatant from L. monocytogenes overnight culture with that from R. insidiosa growth did not increase the biofilm formation by L. monocytogenes (Data not shown). Taken together, these observations indicated that the synergism of these two species in biofilm formation was dependent on direct cell to cell contacts. However, these observations do not preclude the possibility that diffusible signal molecules are also required for this synergistic interaction.
Figure 2. Biofilm formation of L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa in physically separated cultures. Biofilm formation was measured by crystal violet staining of biomass in the base compartment. Letter in the parentheses indicate Listeria or Ralstonia cells in the insert compartment. Neg: Negative control, L: biofilm formation of L. monocytogenes, L(R): effect of R. insidiosa (gown in the insert compartment) on biofilm formation of L. monocytogenes (Grown in the base compartment), R: biofilm formation of R. insidiosa, R(L): effect of L. monocytogenes (Insert compartment) on biofilm formation of R. insidiosa (Base compartment), LR: dual-species biofilm formation in mixed culture in the base compartment.Polystyrene microplates and glasses are the most commonly used substrata for biofilm studies. However, these types of surfaces are scarcely used for food processing. We have previously shown that R. insidiosa promoted the incorporation of E. coli O157:H7 cells into dual species biofilms, using substrata including microplates, glass slides, and glass bottomed petri dishes to facilitate biofilm quantification and microscopic observations [16,20]. In this study, we examined the synergism between L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa in biofilm formation on stainless steel, which is the surface that is most commonly encountered in food processing environments. When L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa were gown in 10% TSB and allowed to form biofilms on stainless steel coupons, visual inspection indicated that L. monocytogenes had minimal biofilm formation in monoculture, and that R. insidiosa formed thick biofilms both in monoculture and in the mixed culture with L. monocytogenes. These observations are similar to those made when the mono-and mixed cultures were grown in tissue culture plates, suggesting the difference in these substrata might not be critical for biofilm formation. After three consecutive rinses, cells remaining attached to the SS coupons were recovered and enumerated (Table 2). While comparable populations of R. insidiosa cells (~8 log CFU/coupon) were recovered for both the mono and mixed cultures, L. monocytogenes cells recovered from the coupons in mixed culture (7.3 log CFU/coupon) were nearly 1.9 logs higher than those from the monoculture (5.4 log CFU/coupon). This nearly 100-fold differential in L. monocytogenes from the mono-and dual-species biofilms indicated that R. insidiosa strongly promoted the incorporation of L. monocytogenes cells into the dual species biofilms.
| Biofilm | L. monocytogenes | R. insidiosa |
| Mono culture | 5.42 ± 0.31a | 8.12 ± 0.05c |
| Mixed culture | 7.32 ± 0.11b | 7.99 ± 0.15c |
| The data represent the means and standard deviations of three independent experiments. Values followed by different letters in superscript are significantly different (P < 0.05). | ||
DownLoad: CSVThe mono-and mixed culture biofilms formed on stainless steel coupons were directly visualized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after rinsing and fixation (Figure 3). Consistent with above enumeration, L. monocytogenes cells in pure culture sparsely attached to the stainless steel surface without forming continuous biofilms (Figure 3A). In contrast, the SS coupons from R. insidiosa mono-and the mixed cultures were colonized by bacterial cells at much higher density which exhibited continuous biofilm characteristics (Figure 3B and Figure 3C). We have been unable to distinguish L. monocytogenes cells from those of R. insidiosa in the mixed culture biofilms by cell morphology under SEM, although it seemed the cells of these two species had slight differences in cell size and shapes, and the cells in the mixed culture biofilms seemed more heterologous. In our previous studies involving biofilms formed on glass fiber filter paper using SEM, R. insidiosa exhibited extensive web-like networking of extra-cellular polymeric substances (EPS), to which E. coli O157:H7 cells seemed to interact. In the current study of biofilm formation on stainless steel surface, such extensive EPS networking was not observed. Nevertheless, cells in the mixed culture biofilms were frequently observed with short EPS filaments (arrows in Figure 3C) connected to neighboring cells. Such cell connecting EPS filaments were rarely observed with the cells from the R. insidiosa monoculture biofilms, and their importance in cellular interactions is not clear. Dubey and Ben-Yehuda [21] hypothesized that such filaments play critical roles in intraspecies communications.
Figure 3. SEM observations of biofilm structure on stainless steel coupons. (A)
L. monocytogenes, (B) R. insidiosa, and (C) dual-species. Arrows points to the observed short EPS filaments in the biofilms of the mixed culture.Overall, we demonstrated that co-culturing L. monocytogenes and R. insidiosa significantly enhanced biofilm formation. L. monocytogenes cells incorporated into dual-species biofilms formed on stainless steel surface increased by nearly 100-fold compared to monoculture. This synergistic interaction in biofilm formation was dependent upon cell-cell contact. The nature of the interaction has yet to be determined.
We thank Dr. Ward (ARS National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research, Peoria, Il.) for providing some L. monocytogenes strains used in this study. Y. Xu is a pre-doctoral visiting student to EMFSL USDA ARS supported by China Scholarship Council.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
| [1] |
Falcone PM, Lopolito A, Sica E (2017) Policy mixes towards sustainability transition in the Italian biofuel sector: Dealing with alternative crisis scenarios. Energy Res Soc Sci 33: 105-114. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.007
|
| [2] |
Falcone PM (2018) Analysing stakeholders' perspectives towards a socio-technical change: The energy transition journey in Gela municipality. AIMS Energy 6: 645-657. doi: 10.3934/energy.2018.4.645
|
| [3] |
Kokkinos K, Karayannis V, Moustakas K (2020) Circular bio-economy via energy transition supported by Fuzzy Cognitive Map modeling towards sustainable low-carbon environment. Sci Total Environ 721: 1-16. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137754
|
| [4] |
Okafor C, Ajaero C, Madu C, et al. (2020) Implementation of circular economy principles in management of end-of-life tyres in a developing country (Nigeria). AIMS Environ Sci 7: 406-433. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2020027
|
| [5] |
Thombs RP (2019) When democracy meets energy transitions: A typology of social power and energy system scale. Energy Res Soc Sci 52: 159-168. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2019.02.020
|
| [6] | Owen R, Brennan G, Lyon F (2018) Enabling investment for the transition to a low carbon economy: Government policy to finance early stage green innovation. Submitted to Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Special Issue for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Cycle and Special Report on Global Warming. |
| [7] | Kah M (2018) Electric vehicles and their impact on oil demand: Why forecasts differ. Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia SIPA, 1-15. |
| [8] | Stevens P (2019) The geopolitical implications of future oil demand, Research Paper. The Royal Institute of International Affairs: Chatham House, 1-42. |
| [9] | Center for Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan (2016) Greenhouse Gases Factsheet. Pub. No. CSS05-21. Available from: https://css.umich.edu/factsheets/greenhouse-gases-factsheet |
| [10] | IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, et al. (Eds.), In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. |
| [11] | Johnston RJ, Blakemore R, Bell R (2020) The role of oil and gas companies in the energy transition. Atlantic Council, Washington DC: USA, 1-44. |
| [12] |
Maji IK (2015) Does clean energy contribute to economic growth? Evidence from Nigeria. Energy Rep 1: 145-150. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2015.06.001
|
| [13] |
Adewuyi OB, Kiptoo MK, Afolayan AF, et al. (2020) Challenges and prospects of Nigeria's sustainable energy transition. Energy Rep 6: 993-1009. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2020.04.022
|
| [14] |
Fouquet R (2016) Historical energy transitions: speed, prices and system transformation. Energy Res Soc Sci 22: 7-12. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.014
|
| [15] | Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. The rise of renewables and energy transition: what adaptation strategy for oil companies and oil-exporting countries? (2018) OIES Paper: MEP 19. 1-25. Available from: https://www.oxfordenergy.org/publications/rise-renewables-energy-transition-adaptation-strategy-oil-companies-oil-exporting-countries/. |
| [16] | Pistelli L (2020) Addressing Africa's energy dilemma. In: Hafner and Tagliapietra (eds), The geopolitics of the global energy transition, Lecture Notes in Energy 73: 151-174. |
| [17] | Sovacool BK (2016) The history and politics of energy transitions: Comparing contested views and finding common ground. United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research, WIDER working paper 2016/81, Helsinki, Finland. |
| [18] |
Zou C, Zhao Q, Zhang G, et al. (2016) Energy revolution: From a fossil fuel energy era to a new energy era. Nat Gas Ind B 3: 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ngib.2016.02.001
|
| [19] | Unger RW (2013) Energy transitions in history: Global cases of continuity and change. Rachel Carson Center Perspectives, 2013/2. |
| [20] | Hafner M, Tagliapietra S (2020) The geopolitics of the global energy transition. In: Lecture Notes in Energy 73: 1-398. |
| [21] | Bressand A (2012) The changed geopolitics of energy and climate and the challenge for Europe. A geopolitical and European perspective on the triple agenda of competition, energy security and sustainability. In: Clingendael international energy programme (CIEP), CIEP paper 04. |
| [22] | REN21, Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (2019) Renewables 2019 Global Status Report (Paris: REN21 Secretariat). ISBN 978-3-9818911-7-1. 1-336. |
| [23] | IRENA (2018) Global energy transformation: A roadmap to 2050. International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi. 1-76. ISBN 978-92-9260-059-4. |
| [24] | Todd J, Thorstensen L (2013) Creating the clean energy economy: Analysis of the electric vehicle industry. International Energy Development Council, Washington DC: USA, 1-100. |
| [25] | Global EV Outlook 2013, Global EV outlook: Understanding the electric vehicle landscape to 2020. Clean Energy Ministerial, Electric Vehicles Initiative and International Energy Agency. |
| [26] | BP (2020) Statistical review of world energy 2020, 69th edition. Available from: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2020-full-report.pdf. |
| [27] | IRENA, International Renewable Energy Agency (2016) Renewable energy benefits: Measuring the economics, Abu Dhabi: UAE, 1-92. |
| [28] |
Endomah N, Foulds C, Jones A (2016) Energy transitions in Nigeria: The evolution of energy infrastructure provision (1800-2015). Energies 9: 484. doi: 10.3390/en9070484
|
| [29] | Porter G (2012) Reflections on a century of road transport developments in West Africa and their (gendered) impacts on the rural poor. EchoGeo 20: 1-16. |
| [30] | Abioye O, Shubber K, Koenigsberger J (2016) Evaluating the role and impact of railway transport in the Nigerian economy, options and choices: Case of Nigerian Railway Corporation. AshEse J Econ 2: 103-113. |
| [31] | Udosen C, Etok A-I, George IN (2009) Fifty years of oil exploration in Nigeria: The paradox of plenty. Glob J Soc Sci 8: 37-47. |
| [32] | World Bank (2017) Nigeria federal roads development project (P090135) Report No: ICR00004170. |
| [33] | EPA (2010) Landfill recovery and use in Nigeria (Pre-feasibility studies of using LFGE). Grant Number: XA83367801, US Environmental Protection Agency and Centre for People and Environment (CPE). |
| [34] | US Energy Information Administration, Biomass explained: Waste-to-energy (Municipal solid waste), 2019. Available from: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/biomass/waste-to-energy.php. |
| [35] | Clean technology investment plan for Nigeria: Updated Note, July 2014, 1-36. |
| [36] | D'Adamo I, Falcone PM, Gastaldi M, et al. (2020) The economic viability of photovoltaic systems in public buildings: Evidence from Italy. Energy 207: 1-10. |
| [37] | PwC, PriceWaterCoopers (2016), Nigeria: Looking beyond oil, 1-32. |
| [38] | Raheem I (2016) Analysis of the effects of oil and non-oil export on economic growth in Nigeria. Hal-01401103v2. |
| [39] | World Bank (2017) Nigeria Bi-annual Economic update: Fragile economy. The World Bank IBRD-IDA No. 1- April 2017. |
| [40] | Oyekanmi S (2020) Updated: Nigerian economy grows by 2.27% in 2019, post highest quarterly growth since 2016 recession. Available from: https://nairametrics.com/2020/02/24/nigerian-economy-grows-by-2-27-post-highest-quarterly-growth-since-2016-recession/. |
| [41] | World Bank (2020) Nigeria's economy faces worst recession in four decades, says new World Bank Report. Available from: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/06/25/nigerias-economy-faces-worst-recession-in-four-decades-says-new-world-bank-report. |
| [42] | Auty RM (2001) Introduction and overview. In Auty RS (Ed.), Resource abundance and economic development (1st ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3-16. |
| [43] | Rosser A (2006) The political economy of the resource curse: A literature survey. IDS Working Paper 268. |
| [44] |
Roche MY, Verolme H, Agbaegbu C, et al. (2020) Achieving sustainable development goals in Nigeria's power sector: Assessment of transition pathways. Clim Policy 20: 846-865. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2019.1661818
|
| [45] | U.S. EIA, Energy Information Administration, (2020) Country analysis executive summary: Nigeria. 1-10. |
| [46] | Okanlawon L (2015) The potential of Nigeria's residential solar rooftop systems. Available from: https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/storage/the-potential-of-nigerias-residential-solar-rooftop-systems/. |
| [47] | Ministry of Mines and Steel Development, nd, Coal. Available from: https://www.minesandsteel.gov.ng/portfolio/coal/. |
| [48] | Chukwu M, Folayan CO, Pam GY, et al. (2016) Characterization of some Nigerian coals for power generation. J Combust, 2016. |
| [49] |
Ogunsola OI (1991) Coal production and utilization trends in Nigeria. Fuel Sci Tech Int 9: 1211-1222. doi: 10.1080/08843759108942323
|
| [50] | Index Mundi, nd, Nigeria coal production and consumption by year (Thousand short tons). Available from: https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?country=ng&product=coal&graph=production+consumption. |
| [51] | MGI, McKinsey Global Institute (2014) Nigeria's renewal: Delivering inclusive growth in Africa's largest economy. |
| [52] | Dorian JP, Shealy MT, Simberk DR (2020) The global energy transition: Where do we go from here? IAEE Energy Forum/Second Quarter 2020: 11-18. |
| [53] | World Bank, Nigeria's flaring reduction target: 2020 (2017). The World Bank IBRD-IDA. Available from: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2017/03/10/nigerias-flaring-reduction-target. |
| [54] | Index mundi (2014) Nigeria crude oil production and consumption by year (Thousand barrels per day). Available from: https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?country=ng&product=oil&graph=production+consumption. |
| [55] | Statista (2020) Oil production in Nigeria from 1998 to 2019. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/265195/oil-production-in-nigeria-barrels-per-day/. |
| [56] | TheGlobalEconomy.com (2020) Nigeria foreign direct investment, percent of GDP, chart. Available from: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Nigeria/Foreign_Direct_Investment/. |
| [57] | UNCTAD, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, (1999) World investment report 1999. United Nations, New York and Geneva. Available from: http://unct.ad.org/en/docs/wir1999_en.pdf. |
| [58] |
Kareem SD, Kari F, Alam GM, et al. (2012) Foreign direct investment into oil sector and economic growth in Nigeria. Int J Appl Econ Finance 6: 127-135. doi: 10.3923/ijaef.2012.127.135
|
| [59] | Nordea (2020) Foreign direct investment (FDI) in Nigeria. Available from: https://www.nordeatrade.com/en/explore-new-market/nigeria/investment. |
| [60] | Scholten D (ed) (2018) The geopolitics of renewables. Springer, New York. |
| [61] | Spiegel (2018) Neuzulassungen: Erstmalsmehralseine Million E-Autos (New Registrations: First time more than one Million Electric Vehicles). Available from: http://www.spi'egel.de/auto/aktuell/emobilitaet-erstmals-ueber-eine-million-e-autoszugelassen-a-1197636.html. |
| [62] | Couture TD, Leidreiter A (2014) How to achieve 100% renewable energy. World Future Council. Mexikoring 29, 22997 Hamburg, Germany, 1-60. |
| [63] | Seplat Petroleum Development Company (2019) Nigeria's energy transformation: Special feature, Seplat Petroleum Development Company Plc Annual Report and Accounts 2019, 44-51. |
| [64] | World Bank, Ecofys and Vivid Economics (2017) State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2017 (November), by World Bank, Washington, DC. Doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-1218-7License:CreativeCommonsAttributionCCBY3.0IGO. |
| [65] | World Economic Forum (2014) Global energy architecture performance index: The new energy architecture challenge—Balancing the energy triangle. |
| [66] | Ministry of Power, Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) National Renewable Energy and Efficiency Policy (NREEEP) approved by FEC for the electricity sector. |
| [67] | Falobi EO (2020) The role of renewable in Nigeria's energy policy mix. Int Assoc Energy Econ (IAEE) Energy Forum/First Quarter 2020: 41-46. |
| [68] | Offgrid Nigeria (2020) CBN aims for ＄10m savings on import substitution for solar equipment. Available from: https://www.offgridnigeria.com/cbn-10m-savings-import-substitution-solar-equipment/. |
| [69] |
Asumadu-Sarkodie S, Owusu PA (2016) A review of Ghana's solar energy potential. AIMS Energy 4: 675-696. doi: 10.3934/energy.2016.5.675
|
| [70] |
Akuru UB (2017) Towards 100% renewable energy in Nigeria. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 71: 943-953. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.123
|
| [71] |
Esae OE, Sarah J, Mofe A (2020) A critical analysis of the role of energy generation from municipal solid waste (MSW). AIMS Environ Sci 7: 387-405. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2020026
|
| [72] | Bala-Gbogbo E (2012) Nigeria sovereign wealth fund to start investing in March. Available from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-12-20/nigeria-sovereign-wealth-fund-to-start-investing-in-march. |
| [73] | NSIA, Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority, (2016) Available from: https://nsia.com.ng/investments. |
| [74] | Eluhaiwe PN (2013) Government role in promoting renewable energy, Central Bank of Nigeria, 1-21. |
| [75] | PwC (2019) X-raying the Nigerian palm oil sector, 1-8. Available from: https://www.pwc.com/ng/en/publications/x-raying-the-nigerian-palm-oil-sector.html. |
| [76] | PwC (2016) Powering Nigeria for the future: The power sector in Nigeria July 2016. |
| [77] | GBI (2013) Nigeria to spend ＄950 million on generator imports by 2020, viewed 10 July 2018. |
| [78] | The Nation Online News, Nigeria is highest generator importer in Africa, 27 August, 2014. Available from: https://thenationonlineng.net//nigeria-is-highest-generator-importer-in-africa/. |
| [79] | Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) (2015) Analysis of energy market conditions in Nigeria' Occasional Paper No. 55. |
| [80] | Greenstone M, Reguant M, Ryan N, et al. (2019) Energy and environment: Evidence paper. International Growth Center (IGC), London School of Economic and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, 1-44. |
| [81] | Obafemi FN, Ifere EO (2013) Non-technical losses, energy efficiency and conservative methodology in the electricity sector of Nigeria: The case of Calabar, Cross River State. Int J Energy Econ Policy 3: 185-192. |
| [82] | Drücke O (2018) Demand-Side Survey and Analysis of Mid-Sized Power Consumers in Nigeria. Let's Make Solar Work, A Nigerian-German Initiative: Lagos, Nigeria. |
| 1. | Manyun Yang, Xiaobo Liu, Yaguang Luo, Arne J. Pearlstein, Shilong Wang, Hayden Dillow, Kevin Reed, Zhen Jia, Arnav Sharma, Bin Zhou, Dan Pearlstein, Hengyong Yu, Boce Zhang, Machine learning-enabled non-destructive paper chromogenic array detection of multiplexed viable pathogens on food, 2021, 2, 2662-1355, 110, 10.1038/s43016-021-00229-5 | |
| 2. | Dennis Nurjadi, Sébastien Boutin, Katja Schmidt, Melinda Ahmels, Daniel Hasche, Identification and Elimination of the Clinically Relevant Multi-Resistant Environmental Bacteria Ralstonia insidiosa in Primary Cell Culture, 2020, 8, 2076-2607, 1599, 10.3390/microorganisms8101599 | |
| 3. | Andrea Foote, Kristin Schutz, Zirui Zhao, Pauline DiGianivittorio, Bethany R. Korwin-Mihavics, John J. LiPuma, Matthew J. Wargo, Olaya Rendueles, Characterizing Biofilm Interactions between Ralstonia insidiosa and Chryseobacterium gleum , 2023, 2165-0497, 10.1128/spectrum.04105-22 | |
| 4. | Faizan Ahmed Sadiq, Koen De Reu, Mette Burmølle, Sharon Maes, Marc Heyndrickx, Synergistic interactions in multispecies biofilm combinations of bacterial isolates recovered from diverse food processing industries, 2023, 14, 1664-302X, 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1159434 | |
| 5. | Qingying Chen, Xingguo Zhang, Qingqing Wang, Jingxian Yang, Qingping Zhong, The mixed biofilm formed by Listeria monocytogenes and other bacteria: Formation, interaction and control strategies, 2023, 1040-8398, 1, 10.1080/10408398.2023.2200861 | |
| 6. | Tessa Tuytschaever, Katleen Raes, Imca Sampers, Listeria monocytogenes in food businesses: From persistence strategies to intervention/prevention strategies—A review, 2023, 1541-4337, 10.1111/1541-4337.13219 | |
| 7. | Tingting Gu, Yaguang Luo, Zhen Jia, Apisak Meesrison, Sophia Lin, Isabella J. Ventresca, Sarah J. Brooks, Arnav Sharma, Sitara Sriram, Manyun Yang, Arne J. Pearlstein, Patricia D. Millner, Keith R. Schneider, Boce Zhang, Surface topography and chemistry of food contact substances, and microbial nutrition affect pathogen persistence and symbiosis in cocktail Listeria monocytogenes biofilms, 2024, 09567135, 110391, 10.1016/j.foodcont.2024.110391 | |
| 8. | Grishma S. Prabhukhot, Charles D. Eggleton, Moon Kim, Jitendra Patel, Impact of surface topography and hydrodynamic flow conditions on single and multispecies biofilm formation by Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Listeria monocytogenes in presence of promotor bacteria, 2024, 201, 00236438, 116240, 10.1016/j.lwt.2024.116240 | |
| 9. | Tessa Tuytschaever, Christine Faille, Katleen Raes, Imca Sampers, Influence of slope, material, and temperature on Listeria monocytogenes and Pseudomonas aeruginosa mono- and dual-species biofilms , 2024, 0892-7014, 1, 10.1080/08927014.2024.2380410 | |
| 10. | Yi Wang, Yihang Feng, Xinhao Wang, Chenyang Ji, Abhinav Upadhyay, Zhenlei Xiao, Yangchao Luo, A short review on Salmonella spp. involved mixed-species biofilm on food processing surface: Interactions, disinfectant resistance and its biocontrol, 2025, 19, 26661543, 101660, 10.1016/j.jafr.2025.101660 | |
| 11. | Julia Burzyńska, Aleksandra Tukendorf, Marta Fangrat, Katarzyna Dzierżanowska-Fangrat, Unveiling Ralstonia spp. in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Clinical Impacts and Antibiotic Resistance, 2025, 14, 2079-6382, 259, 10.3390/antibiotics14030259 |
Chukwuebuka Okafor, Christian Madu, Charles Ajaero, Juliet Ibekwe, Happy Bebenimibo, Chinelo Nzekwe. Moving beyond fossil fuel in an oil-exporting and emerging economy: Paradigm shift[J]. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(2): 379-413. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021020
| Strain | Serotype | Isolation Source | Collections |
| R. insidiosa | |||
| FC1138 | NA | Fresh produce facility | EMFSL |
| L. monocytogenes | |||
| FS2005 | 1/2a | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2006 | 3b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2007 | 1/2b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2008 | 4b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2009 | 4b | Spinal fluid of child with meningitis | ATCC |
| FS2017 | 4b | Beef and pork sausage | EMFSL |
| FS2018 | 1/2b | Hard salami | EMFSL |
| FS2019 | 1/2a | Frankfurter | EMFSL |
| FS2025 | 1/2b | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| FS2026 | 1/2a | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| EMFSL: Environmental Microbial and Food Safety Laboratory, USDA ARS; ATCC: American Type Culture Collections; NRRL: Northern Regional Research Laboratory, USDA ARS. | |||
DownLoad: CSV| Biofilm | L. monocytogenes | R. insidiosa |
| Mono culture | 5.42 ± 0.31a | 8.12 ± 0.05c |
| Mixed culture | 7.32 ± 0.11b | 7.99 ± 0.15c |
| The data represent the means and standard deviations of three independent experiments. Values followed by different letters in superscript are significantly different (P < 0.05). | ||
DownLoad: CSV| Strain | Serotype | Isolation Source | Collections |
| R. insidiosa | |||
| FC1138 | NA | Fresh produce facility | EMFSL |
| L. monocytogenes | |||
| FS2005 | 1/2a | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2006 | 3b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2007 | 1/2b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2008 | 4b | Milk | EMFSL |
| FS2009 | 4b | Spinal fluid of child with meningitis | ATCC |
| FS2017 | 4b | Beef and pork sausage | EMFSL |
| FS2018 | 1/2b | Hard salami | EMFSL |
| FS2019 | 1/2a | Frankfurter | EMFSL |
| FS2025 | 1/2b | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| FS2026 | 1/2a | Cantaloupe | NRRL |
| EMFSL: Environmental Microbial and Food Safety Laboratory, USDA ARS; ATCC: American Type Culture Collections; NRRL: Northern Regional Research Laboratory, USDA ARS. | |||
| Biofilm | L. monocytogenes | R. insidiosa |
| Mono culture | 5.42 ± 0.31a | 8.12 ± 0.05c |
| Mixed culture | 7.32 ± 0.11b | 7.99 ± 0.15c |
| The data represent the means and standard deviations of three independent experiments. Values followed by different letters in superscript are significantly different (P < 0.05). | ||
