| Literature DB >> 29896682 |
Shanwen Zeng1,2, Fuzhong Song3,4, Peili Lu1,2, Qiang He5,6, Daijun Zhang7,8.
Abstract
With volatile fatty acids as substrates, the typical polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) production by mixed culture always includes two steps: PHA-storing culture enrichment via aerobic dynamic feeding strategy and PHA accumulation under nutrient-limited condition. To simplify the PHA-production steps, the enrichment and accumulation step were coupled in a SBR. At start-up period, to investigate the effect of settling selection, one acetate-fed SBR was operated by settling selection-double growth limitation (SS-DGL) strategy, while the other was operated by DGL strategy. The results showed that the stable operation in SBR1 was obtained at about 21, 12 days faster than SBR2, implying the settling selection accelerated the start-up process. After omitting the settling selection under the stable operation, the SBR1 was run above 15 days. The results showed that the performance was not substantial altered. Therefore, the settling selection affected the start-up process but not the stable operation. At operational period, based on the sharp decreasing of oxygen uptake rate (OUR), the poly-β-hydroxybutyrate (PHB) content was improved 13%, from 70 to 83% by feed-on-demand control-double growth limitation (FD-DGL). And the harvested volumetric productivity was 5.0 gPHB/L/day, almost 1-folder improvement. That was to say, the PHB production in a SBR of coupling the enrichment and accumulation step was improved by feed-on-demand control. Meanwhile, the FD experiment can keep steady running for 10 SRTs. Therefore, the SS-DGL/FD-DGL strategy was a promising method for PHA production.Entities:
Keywords: Coupling; Feed-on-demand control; Mixed culture; Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate (PHB); Settling selection
Year: 2018 PMID: 29896682 PMCID: PMC5997608 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-018-0628-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Fig. 1a MLSS concentration, SVI and b PHB % profiles in SBR1 and SBR2 throughout the experiment
The 12 most abundant bacteria identified by high throughput sequencing in the two SBRs under stable operation
| SBR1 | SBR2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phylum | Genus | % | Phylum | Genus | % | |
| 1 |
|
| 31.9 |
|
| 23.8 |
| 2 |
|
| 21.3 |
|
| 21.5 |
| 3 |
|
| 9.8 |
|
| 19.4 |
| 4 |
|
| 3.0 |
|
| 3.5 |
| 5 |
|
| 0.5 |
|
| 5.2 |
| 6 |
|
| 0.1 |
|
| 0.7 |
| 7 |
|
| 2.7 |
|
| 1.3 |
| 8 |
|
| 1.4 |
|
| 0.9 |
| 9 |
|
| 0.7 |
|
| 0.7 |
| 10 |
|
| 0.2 |
|
| 0.6 |
| 11 |
|
| 2.7 |
|
| 0.4 |
| 12 |
|
| 1.3 |
|
| 0.3 |
| Total reported PHA-storing bacteria (in bold) | 66.4 | Total reported PHA-storing bacteria (in bold) | 66.7 | |||
Fig. 2PHB content during the feast phase in a typical cycle before (green) and after (red) omitting the settling selection
Overview of PHB accumulating performance in SBR, FD and batch experiment
| Time PHB max. (h) | PHB max. (wt%) | YP/S (CmolPHB/CmolAc) | qAC (CmolAc/CmolX/h) | qP (CmolPHB/CmolX/h) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SBR experimenta | 5.6 ± 0.3 | 70.2 ± 1.9 | 0.60 ± 0.02 | 0.71 ± 0.04 | 0.43 ± 0.06 |
| FD experimenta | 5.6 ± 0.25 | 83.0 ± 0.8 | 0.81 ± 0.02 | 1.05 ± 0.05 | 0.85 ± 0.07 |
| Batch experiment | Almost 10 | 86.4 ± 1.2 | 0.77 ± 0.01 | 0.83 ± 0.05 | 0.64 ± 0.06 |
| Johnson et al. ( | 7.6 | 89 | 0.6 | NA | NA |
| Chen et al. ( | 6.5 | 74.16 ± 0.03 | 0.77 ± 0.05 | 0.82 ± 0.03 | 0.63 ± 0.06 |
| Marang et al. ( | 10–12 | 86 ± 1 | NA | NA | NA |
a To keep the same feast length, the amount of Ac was 124.5 and 182 Cmmol/L in SBR and FD experiment, respectively
b Date from the accumulation experiments of the three references
Fig. 3The signal of DO (red cycle), OUR (blue triangle) and dOUR/dt (purple square) during the feast phase in a typical cycle applying the feed-on-demand control
Fig. 4The accumulative amount of HAc fed during the feast phase in a typical cycle applying the feed-on-demand control
Fig. 5Results in a typical cycle applying the feed-on-demand control, feast phase (left) and famine phase (right)
Fig. 6PHB accumulating performance in SBR (a), FD (b) and batch (c) experiment