| Literature DB >> 27399199 |
Anja S Ziegler1, Simon J McIlroy1, Poul Larsen1, Mads Albertsen1, Aviaja A Hansen1, Nicolas Heinen2, Per Halkjær Nielsen1.
Abstract
Membrane fouling presents the greatest challenge to the application of membrane bioreactor (MBR) technology. Formation of biofilms on the membrane surface is the suggested cause, yet little is known of the composition or dynamics of the microbial community responsible. To gain an insight into this important question, we applied 16S rREntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27399199 PMCID: PMC4939938 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158811
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1a) Schematic of the pilot scale MBR used in this study. Influent was raw wastewater and effluent was treated wastewater. b) Changes in flux (permeate flow) during the seven-week sampling period. During week 4 there was a break-down of the aerator.
Fig 2a) SYTO 9 stained cells which shows the amount of filaments at week 1 and b) week 7. The scale bar represents 10 μm. c) The thickness of the biofilm shown as 20 repeated measurements (points) for each of the two weeks.
Fig 3Heatmap showing the microbial composition represented as the 10 most abundant genera of CAS bulk sludge samples (CAS), MBR bulk sludge samples (MBR) and biofilm samples (BF), combined yielding 21 genera.
The OTU number is given if it was not classified to the genus level with the MiDAS taxonomy. The data is visualised as a table with underlying colours showing changes and numbers showing the relative read abundances. W1-7 indicate the sampling time (in weeks).
Fig 4a) PCA plot showing overall differences between CAS bulk sludge samples (CAS, green), MBR bulk sludge samples (MBR, blue) and biofilm samples (BF, red). b) Stability plot showing how similar each sample is to the previous one using Bray-Curtis dissimilarity.