| Literature DB >> 27196300 |
Xiang Tu1,2,3, Jianjun Li2,4,3, Rongfang Feng1,3, Guoping Sun2,4,3, Jun Guo1,2,4,3.
Abstract
Although biotrickling filters (BTFs) applied under acidic condition to remove H2S from waste gases have been reported, the removal behavior of the acidic BTF under transient condition which was normal in most industry processes, and corresponding bacterial community have not been thoroughly studied. In the present study, two BTFs were run under neutral (BTFn) and acidic (BTFa) conditions, respectively. The results revealed that the removal performance of BTFa under transient condition was superior to that of BTFn; the maximum H2S eliminating capacities (ECs) achieved by BTFa and BTFn were 489.9 g/m3 h and 443.6 g/m3 h, respectively. High-throughput sequencing suggested that pH was the critical factor and several other factors including nutrient and the inlet loadings also had roles in shaping bacterial community structure. Acidithiobacillus was the most abundant bacterial group. The results indicated that BTF acclimation under acidic condition may facilitate generating microbial community with high H2S-degrading capability.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27196300 PMCID: PMC4873206 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155593
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Schematic diagram of the biotrickling filter.
(1) H2S cylinder, (2) Mixing chamber, (3,4) Gas flowmeter, (5) Air compressor, (6) NaOH dosing pump, (7,8) Nutrient tank, (9,10) pH probe, (11,12) Peristaltic pump, (13–15) BTFa-u/m/b port for sampling packing materials, (16–18) BTFn-u/m/b port for sampling packing materials.
Fig 2H2S removal profile along the column of the two BTFs at the each inlet loading under the EBRTs.
(a): EBRT = 60s BTFa; (b): EBRT = 60s BTFn; (c): EBRT = 30s BTFa; (d): EBRT = 30s BTFn; (e): EBRT = 15s BTFa; (f): EBRT = 15s BTFn.
Fig 3Complete mineralization rate of H2S for different EBRTs as the inlet load increases.
Fig 4Principal component analysis of the different communities in the tested BTFs.
The relative abundances of main bacterial phylum.
| Average relative abundance (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BTFa | BTFn | |||||
| Bacterial phylum | BTFa-u | BTFa-m | BTFa-b | BTFn-u | BTFn-m | BTFn-b |
| 63.9 | 72.6 | 77.7 | 56.0 | 66.1 | 66.8 | |
| | 7.9 | 4.8 | 3.0 | 13.3 | 14.4 | 10.8 |
| | 20.0 | 32.9 | 23.6 | 25.2 | 29.9 | 19.1 |
| | 1.2 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 2.4 | 2.9 |
| | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| | 31.6 | 29.4 | 46.7 | 13.1 | 18.1 | 32.7 |
| Other | 3.2 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| 8.2 | 5.2 | 2.7 | 8.0 | 3.2 | 3.4 | |
| 6.3 | 6.2 | 6.2 | 5.0 | 5.6 | 6.2 | |
| 4.6 | 1.6 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 | |
| 2.9 | 2.9 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.4 | |
| 1.0 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | |
| 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 10.6 | 9.5 | 8.1 | |
| 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 1.1 | |
| 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 1.1 | 1.1 | |
| 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 2.9 | 1.3 | 1.6 | |
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 2.0 | |
| Other | 6.4 | 5.0 | 4.7 | 4.2 | 3.6 | 3.5 |
Fig 5The heat map of the dominant genus in the two BTFs.