Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology (한국미생물·생명공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Divergence of Granular Sludges and Microbial Communities in Two Types of Anaerobic Reactors Treating Different Wastewaters

  • Qin, Xianchao (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Li, Chunjie (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Gao, Yueshu (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Zhang, Zhenjia (School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) ;
  • Zhang, Xiaojun (State Key Laboratory of Microbial Metabolism, and Joint International Research Laboratory of Metabolic and Developmental Sciences, and School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University)
  • Received : 2018.07.02
  • Accepted : 2018.09.15
  • Published : 2019.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

An advanced anaerobic expanded granular sludge bed (AnaEG) and an internal circulation (IC) reactor, which were adopted to treat starch processing wastewater (SPW) and ethanol processing wastewater (EPW), were comprehensively analyzed to determine the key factors that affected the granules and microbial communities in the bioreactors. The granule size of $900{\mu}m$ in the AnaEG reactor was smaller than that in the IC reactor, and the internal and external morphological structures of the granular sludge were also significantly different between the two types of reactors. The biodiversity, which was higher in the AnaEG reactor, was mainly affected by reactor type. However, the specific microbial community structure was determined by the type of wastewater. Furthermore, the dominant methanogens of EPW were mainly Methanosaeta and Methanobacterium, but only Methanosaeta was a major constituent in SPW. Compared with the IC reactor, characteristics common to the AnaEG reactor were smaller granules, higher biodiversity and larger proportion of unknown species. The comparison of characteristics between these two reactors not only aids in understanding the novel AnaEG reactor type, but also elucidates the effects of reactor type and wastewater type on the microbial community and sludge structure. This information would be helpful in the application of the novel AnaEG reactor.

Keywords

References

  1. Angenent LT, Karim K, Al-Dahhan MH, Wrenn BA, Domiguez-Espinosa R. 2004. Production of bioenergy and biochemicals from industrial and agricultural wastewater. Trends Biotechnol. 22: 477-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2004.07.001
  2. Aydin S, Ince B, Ince O. 2015. Application of real-time PCR to determination of combined effect of antibiotics on Bacteria, Methanogenic Archaea, Archaea in anaerobic sequencing batch reactors. Water Res. 76: 88-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.02.043
  3. Ambuchi JJ, Liu JF, Wang HM, Shan LL, Zhou XT, Mohammed MOA, et al. 2016. Microbial community structural analysis of an expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactor for beet sugar industrial wastewater (BSIW) treatment. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 100: 4651-4661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-015-7245-2
  4. Wang DP, Liu B, Ding XC, Sun XB, Liang Z, Sheng SX, et al. 2017. Performance evaluation and microbial community analysis of the function and fate of ammonia in a sulfatereducing EGSB reactor. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 101: 7729-7739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-017-8514-z
  5. Narihiro T, Terada T, Ohashi A, Kamagata Y, Nakamura K, Sekiguchi Y. 2012. Quantitative detection of previously characterized syntrophic bacteria in anaerobic wastewater treatment systems by sequence-specific rRNA cleavage method. Water Res. 46: 2167-2175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.01.034
  6. Austermann-Haun U, Meyer H, Seyfried CF, Rosenwinkel KH. 1999. Full scale experiences with anaerobic/aerobic treatment plants in the food and beverage industry. Water Sci. Technol. 40: 305-312.
  7. Jeffrey JW, Dan K, Marcelo LG, Nicholas BS, Samual S, Kevin Y, et al. 2011. Bacterial community structures are unique and resilient in full-scale bioenergy systems. PNAS 108: 4158-4163. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1015676108
  8. De Vrieze J, Raport L, Roume H, Vilchez-Vargas R, Jauregui R, Pieper DH, et al. 2016. The full-scale anaerobic digestion microbiome is represented by specific marker populations. Water Res. 104: 101-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.08.008
  9. Fang C, Boe K, Angelidaki I. 2011. Biogas production from potato-juice, a by-product from potato-starch processing, in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) and expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) reactors. Bioresour. Technol. 102: 5734-5741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.013
  10. Fettig J, Pick V, Austermann-Haun U, Blumberg M, Phuoc NV. 2013. Treatment of tapioca starch wastewater by a novel combination of physical and biological processes. Water Sci. Technol. 68: 1264-1270. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2013.354
  11. Zhao LK, Li XM, Mo CR, Zhang CL, Cui W, Xie T. 2012. Effect of Low concentration cyanide on startup of Expanded Granular Sludge Bed for the treatment of tapioca starch wastewater. Adv. Environ. Sci. Eng. 518-523: 2493-2499.
  12. Li CJ, Tabassum S, Zhang ZJ. 2014. An advanced anaerobic expanded granular sludge bed (AnaEG) for the treatment of coal gasification wastewater. Rsc Adv. 4: 57580-57586. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA08042D
  13. Qin XC, Wu XG, Li LF, Li CJ, Zhang ZJ, Zhang XJ. 2018. The advanced anaerobic expanded granular sludge bed (AnaEG) possessed temporally and spatially stable treatment performance and microbial community in treating starch processing wastewater. Front. Microbiol. 9: 589. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.00589
  14. Antwi P, Li JZ, Boadi PO, Meng J, Shi E, Xue C, et al. 2017. Functional bacterial and archaeal diversity revealed by 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing during potato starch processing wastewater treatment in an UASB. Bioresour. Technol. 235: 348-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.141
  15. Xing YJ, Ji JY, Zheng P, Zhang JQ, Ghulam A. 2014. Microbial consortium and its spatial distribution in a compartmentalized anaerobic reactor. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98: 1357-1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-013-5003-x
  16. Griffiths RI, Whiteley AS, O'Donnell AG, Bailey MJ. 2000. Rapid method for coextraction of DNA and RNA from natural environments for analysis of ribosomal DNA- and rRNA-based microbial community composition. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66: 5488-5491. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.66.12.5488-5491.2000
  17. Wang Y, Tian H, Huang F, Long WM, Zhang QP, Wang J, et al. 2017. Time-resolved analysis of a denitrifying bacterial community revealed a core microbiome responsible for the anaerobic degradation of quinoline. Sci. Rep. 7: 14778. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15122-0
  18. Zhang QP, Wu YQ, Wang J, Wu GJ, Long WM, Xue ZS, et al. 2016. Accelerated dysbiosis of gut microbiota during aggravation of DSS-induced colitis by a butyrate-producing bacterium. Sci. Rep. 6: 27572. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27572
  19. Edgar RC. 2013. UPARSE: highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nat. Methods 10: 996-1000. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2604
  20. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R. 2011. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27: 2194-2200. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btr381
  21. Cole JR, Wang Q, Fish JA, Chai B, McGarrell DM, Sun Y, et al. 2014. Ribosomal Database Project: data and tools for high throughput rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 42: 633-642. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt1244
  22. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, et al. 2010. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7: 335-336. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303
  23. Torres K, Alvarez-Hornos FJ, San-Valero P, Gabaldon C, Marzal P. 2018. Granulation and microbial community dynamics in the chitosan-supplemented anaerobic treatment of wastewater polluted with organic solvents. Water Res. 130: 376-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.12.009
  24. Popp D, Plugge CM, Kleinsteuber S, Harms H, Strauber H. 2017. Inhibitory effect of coumarin on syntrophic fatty acid-oxidizing and methanogenic cultures and biogas reactor microbiomes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 83: 1-14.
  25. Chen CL, Wu JH, Tseng IC, Liang TM, Liu WT. 2009. Characterization of active microbes in a full-scale anaerobic fluidized bed reactor treating phenolic wastewater. Microbes Environ. 24: 144-153. https://doi.org/10.1264/jsme2.ME09109
  26. Connelly S, Shin SG, Dillon RJ, Ijaz UZ, Quince C, Sloan WT, et al. 2017. Bioreactor scalability: laboratory-scale bioreactor design influences performance, ecology, and community physiology in expanded granular sludge bed bioreactors. Front. Microbiol. 8: 664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00664
  27. Hao L, Bize A, Conteau D, Chapleur O, Courtois S, Kroff P, et al. 2016. New insights into the key microbial phylotypes of anaerobic sludge digesters under different operational conditions. Water Res. 102: 158-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.06.014
  28. Yamada T, Imachi H, Ohashi A, Harada H, Hanada S, Kamagata Y, et al. 2007. Bellilinea caldifistulae gen. nov., sp. nov. and Longilinea arvoryzae gen. nov., sp. nov., strictly anaerobic, filamentous bacteria of the phylum Chloroflexi isolated from methanogenic propionate-degrading consortia. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 57: 2299-2306. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.65098-0
  29. Yan ZS, Jiang HL, Cai HY, Zhou YL, Krumholz LR. 2015. Complex interactions between the macrophyte acorus calamus and microbial fuel cells during pyrene and benzo[${\alpha}$]pyrene degradation in sediments. Sci. Rep. 5: 10709. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep10709
  30. Lu XQ, Zhen GY, Estrada AL, Chen M, Ni JL, Hojo T, et al. 2015. Operation performance and granule characterization of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor treating wastewater with starch as the sole carbon source. Bioresour. Technol. 180: 264-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.01.010
  31. Antwi P, Li J, Boadi PO, Meng J, Koblah Quashie F, Wang X, et al. 2017. Efficiency of an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating potato starch processing wastewater and related process kinetics, functional microbial community and sludge morphology. Bioresour. Technol. 239: 105-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.124
  32. Sun YJ, Xing W, Li JP, Lu YQ, Zuo JE. 2009. Microbial community in granules from a high-rate EGSB reactor. Prikl. Biokhim. Mikrobiol. 45: 659-663.
  33. Wu J, Bi L, Zhang JB, Poncin S, Cao ZP, Li HZ. 2012. Effects of increase modes of shear force on granule disruption in upflow anaerobic reactors. Water Res. 46: 3189-3196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.03.042
  34. Wang L, Zheng P, Xing YJ, Li W, Yang J, Abbas G, et al. 2014. Effect of particle size on the performance of autotrophic nitrogen removal in the granular sludge bed reactor and microbiological mechanisms. Bioresour. Technol. 157: 240-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.116
  35. Lu XQ, Ni JL, Zhen GY, Kubota K, Li YY. 2018. Response of morphology and microbial community structure of granules to influent COD/$SO_4^{2-}$ ratios in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor treating starch wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 256: 456-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.02.055
  36. Sundberg C, Al-Soud WA, Larsson M, Alm E, Yekta SS, Svensson BH, et al. 2013. 454 pyrosequencing analyses of bacterial and archaeal richness in 21 full-scale biogas digesters. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 85: 612-626. https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6941.12148
  37. Kharayat Y. 2012. Distillery wastewater: bioremediation approaches. J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 9: 69-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2012.688056
  38. Schmidt JE, Ahring BK. 1994. Extracellular polymers in granular sludge from different upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 42: 457-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00902757
  39. Ding JN, Wang DZ. 2005. Influence of external circulation on sludge characteristics during start-up of internal circulation reactor. J. Cent. South. Univ. T. 12: 425-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-005-0176-9
  40. Wang JD, Xu WJ, Yan JJ, Yu JM. 2014. Study on the flow characteristics and the wastewater treatment performance in modified internal circulation reactor. Chemosphere 117: 631-637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.09.088
  41. Ueki A, Akasaka H, Satoh A, Suzuki D, Ueki K. 2007. Prevotella paludivivens sp. nov., a novel strictly anaerobic, Gram-negative, hemicellulose-decomposing bacterium isolated from plant residue and rice roots in irrigated rice-field soil. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 57: 1803-1809. https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.64914-0

Cited by

  1. Database Mining to Unravel the Ecology of the Phylum Chloroflexi in Methanogenic Full Scale Bioreactors vol.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.603234