| Literature DB >> 25763018 |
S Q Silva1, D C Silva1, M C S Lanna1, B E L Baeta2, S F Aquino2.
Abstract
The present work aimed to investigate the microbial dynamics during the anaerobic treatment of the azo dye blue HRFL in bench scale upflow anaerobic sludge bed (UASB) reactor operated at ambient temperature. Sludge samples were collected under distinct operational phases, when the reactor were stable (low variation of color removal), to assess the effect of glucose and yeast extract as source of carbon and redox mediators, respectively. Reactors performance was evaluated based on COD (chemical oxygen demand) and color removal. The microbial dynamics were investigated by PCR-DGGE (Polimerase Chain Reaction - Denaturing Gradient of Gel Electrophoresis) technique by comparing the 16S rDNA profiles among samples. The results suggest that the composition of microorganisms changed from the beginning to the end of the reactor operation, probably in response to the presence of azo dye and/or its degradation byproducts. Despite the highest efficiency of color removal was observed in the presence of 500 mg/L of yeast extract (up to 93%), there were no differences regarding the microbial profiles that could indicate a microbial selection by the yeast extract addition. On the other hand Methosarcina barkeri was detected only in the end of operation when the best efficiencies on color removal occurred. Nevertheless the biomass selection observed in the last stages of UASB operation is probably a result of the washout of the sludge in response of accumulation of aromatic amines which led to tolerant and very active biomass that contributed to high efficiencies on color removal.Entities:
Keywords: PCR-DGGE; UASB reactor; azo dye; microbial profile; wastewater treatment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25763018 PMCID: PMC4323287 DOI: 10.1590/s1517-83822014000400005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Microbiol ISSN: 1517-8382 Impact factor: 2.476
Operational conditions applied to the UASB reactor for azo dye degradation.
| Operational phases | Time of operation | Glucose (mg/L) | Blue HFRL dye(mg/L) | Yeast extract (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 10 | 500 | - | - |
| P2 | 14 | 450 | 50 | - |
| P3 | 13 | 350 | 50 | 100 |
| P4 | 14 | - | 50 | 100 |
| P5 | 14 | 350 | 50 | 500 |
| P6 | 17 | 500 | - | - |
| P7 | 15 | 450 | 50 | - |
| P8 | 13 | - | 50 | 500 |
Days counted after the reactor had reached stability, based on low variation of color removal.
Average values of color and COD removal efficiency, and TS and CODVFA concentration in the UASB reactor in different operational phases.
| P1 (n = 7) | P2 (n = 11) | P3 (n = 10) | P4 (n = 10) | P5 (n = 12) | P6 (n = 9) | P7 (n = 8) | P8 (n = 10) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Color Removal Efficiency (%) | - | 65 ± 7 | 64 ± 4 | 54 ± 6 | 93 ± 3 | - | 62 ± 6 | 91 ± 1 |
| COD Removal Efficiency (%) | 24 ± 5 | 43 ± 11 | 44 ± 25 | 0 | 40 ± 15 | 49 ± 4 | 61 ± 7 | 54 ± 4 |
| Total Solids (digestion chamber) (g) | 60 ± 4.0 | 65 ± 6.1 | 42 ± 7.8 | 20 ± 3.1 | 40 ± 3.2 | 40 ± 2.9 | 40 ± 3.5 | 10 ± 0.8 |
| CODVFA (mg/L) | - | 55 ± 12 | 210 ± 63 | - | 322 ± 103 | 201 ± 43 | 87 ± 15 | 86 ± 18 |
± standard deviation, -not measured.
Specific rates of COD consumption and azo dye removal in the UASB reactor in different operational phases.
| P1 (n = 7) | P2 (n = 11) | P3 (n = 10) | P4 (n = 10) | P5 (n = 12) | P6 (n = 9) | P7 (n = 8) | P8 (n = 10) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specific rate on COD consumption (g/kg.d) | 18.5 ± 3.7 | 39.1 ± 9.7 | 43.7 ± 24 | 0 | 132.6 ± 49 | 78.8 ± 7.8 | 95.1 ± 10.8 | 127.4 ± 8.9 |
| Specific rate on decolorization (g/kg.d) | - | 5.3 ± 0.6 | 6.0 ± 0.4 | 9.0 ± 0.9 | 16.7 ± 0.5 | - | 8.3 ± 0.8 | 19.6 ± 0.2 |
± standard deviation.
Figure 1DGGE fingerprint of sludge samples based on the eletrophoretic mobility of 16S rDNA sequences. a) bacterial sequences amplified by primers 968F-GC/1392R on a denaturing gradient of 40%–60%. b) archaeal sequences amplified by primers 1100F-GC/1400R on a denaturing gradient of 35%–55%. Legend: P1 to P8: operational phases (see Table 1); D1 to D10 selected bacterial bands; B1 to B8 selected archaeal bands.
Figure 2Dendograms based on DGGE profiles using the Jaccard dissimilarity coefficient constructed in SYN-TAX Program. a) dissimilarity among bacterial DGGE profiles during the reactor operation. b) dissimilarity among archaeal DGGE profiles during the reactor operation.
Figure 3Neighbor Joining phylogenetic tree containing archaeal 16S from DGGE bands as well as the closest sequences from the RDP-10 database. Bar = 1.0% estimated phylogenetic divergence. The bootstrap support (1,000 replicates) values are shown at nodes. All sequences (~300 bp) were aligned using Jukes-Cantor model and phylogenetically analysed in Mega 4 software.