| Literature DB >> 25712194 |
Johanna Klang1,2, Susanne Theuerl1, Ulrich Szewzyk2, Markus Huth3, Rainer Tölle3, Michael Klocke1.
Abstract
This study investigated the development of the microbial community during a long-term (337 days) anaerobic digestion of maize and sugar beet silage, two feedstocks that significantly differ in their chemical composition. For the characterization of the microbial dynamics, the community profiling method terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (TRFLP) in combination with a cloning-sequencing approach was applied. Our results revealed a specific adaptation of the microbial community to the supplied feedstocks. Based on the high amount of complex compounds, the anaerobic conversion rate of maize silage was slightly lower compared with the sugar beet silage. It was demonstrated that members from the phylum Bacteroidetes are mainly involved in the degradation of low molecular weight substances such as sugar, ethanol and acetate, the main compounds of the sugar beet silage. It was further shown that species of the genus Methanosaeta are highly sensitive against sudden stress situations such as a strong decrease in the ammonium nitrogen (NH₄(+)-N) concentration or a drop of the pH value. In both cases, a functional compensation by members of the genera Methanoculleus and/or Methanosarcina was detected. However, the overall biomass conversion of both feedstocks proceeded efficiently as a steady state between acid production and consumption was recorded, which further resulted in an equal biogas yield.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25712194 PMCID: PMC4554465 DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.12263
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microb Biotechnol ISSN: 1751-7915 Impact factor: 5.813
Chemical composition of the supplied feedstocks maize silage (MS) and sugar beet silage (SBS) as well as the ratio of each compound in comparison of MS and SBS
| Parameter | Unit | MS | SBS | MS:SBS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TS | (% FM) | 27 | 14 | 2:1 |
| VS | (% TS) | 96 | 95 | 1:1 |
| Lignin | (g kgFM−1) | 6 | 4 × 10−2 | 142:1 |
| Cellulose | (g kgFM−1) | 58 | 5 | 12:1 |
| Hemicellulose | (g kgFM−1) | 49 | 4 | 14:1 |
| Starch | (g kgFM−1) | 0.8 | 0.2 | 4:1 |
| Sugar | (g kgFM−1) | 0.01 | 0.17 | 1:19 |
| Crude fat | (g kgFM−1) | 1.0 × 10−4 | 5.3 × 10−6 | 20:1 |
| Crude protein | (g kgFM−1) | 20 | 7 | 3:1 |
| TKN | (g kgFM−1) | 3.2 | 1.3 | 2.5:1 |
| NH4+-N | (g kgFM−1) | 0.06 | 0.11 | 1:2 |
| Ethanol | (g kgFM−1) | 2 | 24 | 1:12 |
| Acetate | (g kgFM−1) | 5 | 10 | 1:2 |
Values are given as single measurements of a composite sample. TS = total solids, FM = fresh mass, VS = volatile solids, TKN = total Kjeldahl nitrogen, NH4+-N = ammonium nitrogen.
Figure 1Highly temporal resolution of the kinetics of the biogas production rates over 4 days at OLR 2.0 gVS l−1 day−1 for both the anaerobic digestion of maize silage and sugar beet silage. Shown are mean values including the standard deviation of the three parallel reactors per feedstock. “Feeding” indicate time-points of substrate addition.
Figure 2Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) and ammonium nitrogen (NH4+-N) concentration of the maize reactor digestate as well as the sugar beet reactor digestate over the entire experimental time as mean values including standard deviation of the three parallel reactors per feedstock.
Figure 3Structure of the bacterial community involved in the biomethanation process of (A) maize silage and (B) sugar beet silage. Shown is the relative abundance of the detected terminal restriction fragments (TRFs) as a function of the percental fluorescence intensity of each individual TRF in relation to the total fluorescence intensity. Coloured bars symbolize TRFs in base pairs (bp), which were identified by 16S rRNA gene sequence libraries. Only TRFs with a relative abundance over 5 % in at least one sample are shown. Each sampling point is given as median value of three biological replicates (i.e. parallel-operated biogas reactors) and three technical replicates (i.e. three DNA extracts per reactor). Numbers in sampling point descriptors indicate the duration of continuous fermentation in days.
Phylogenetic assignment of the detected bacterial TRFs by screening of 16S rRNA gene sequence libraries using the RDP Classifier as well as selected species examples from the identified families and their physiological potential to identify the functionality of the dominant groups within the maize and sugar beet reactors
| Phylogenetic assignment (phylum, class, order, family) | Species examples and their potential function within the AD process chain | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sugar fermentation | Ueki and colleagues ( | ||
| (TRF-84bp, TRF-93bp, TRF-95bp) | Mono- and disaccharide fermentation | Grabowski and colleagues ( | |
| Protein degradation | Chen and Dong ( | ||
| Utilization of starch, non-cellulosic polysaccharides, and simple sugars | Purushe and colleagues ( | ||
| Only cellulose is hydrolyzed and metabolized; removes xylose-rich hemicelluloses to gain access to cellulose | Suen and colleagues ( | ||
| Utilization of starch, non-cellulosic polysaccharides, and simple sugars | Chen and colleagues ( | ||
| Degradation of mono- and disaccharides, xylane and cellulose, but no starch | Nishiyama and colleagues ( | ||
| Highly cellulolytic, degrade cellulose and hemicellulose | Suen and colleagues ( | ||
| Degradation of cellulose, hemicellulose and pectin | Cai and colleagues ( | ||
| Pectin degradation | Cornick and colleagues ( | ||
| Mono- and disaccharide fermentation, non-cellulolytic, non-acido./acetogenic | Mechichi and colleagues ( | ||
| Utilization of monosaccharides, peptides and amino acids and pyruvate | Yamada and colleagues ( | ||
| Fermentation of divers carbohydrates (incl. hemicellulose) and proteins; | Yamada and colleagues ( | ||
| enhanced growth in co-cultivation with hydrogenotrophic methanogens | |||
| WWE1 candidate division | Fermentation of amino acids, sugars, and carboxylic acids; synthrophic | Pelletier and colleagues ( | |
| Unknown | No functional relation possible | ||
| Unknown | |||
| Unknown | |||
| Unknown | No phylogenetic and no functional relation possible | ||
Figure 4Structure of the archaeal community involved in the biomethanation process of (A) maize silage and (B) sugar beet silage. Shown is the relative abundance of the detected terminal restriction fragments (TRFs) as a function of the percental fluorescence intensity of each individual TRF in relation to the total fluorescence intensity. Coloured bars symbolize TRFs in base pairs (bp), which were identified by 16S rRNA gene sequence libraries. Each sampling point is given as median value of three biological replicates (i.e. parallel-operated biogas reactors) and three technical replicates (i.e. three DNA extracts per reactor). Numbers in sampling point descriptors indicate duration of continuous fermentation in days.
Figure 5Correlation between the abundance of TRF-428bp (related to Methanoculleus) and TRF-108bp (related to Methanosaeta) in (A) the maize reactors and (B) the sugar beet reactors. Only samples indicated by a full black dot were considered for correlation. R2 is the correlation coefficient.